From: Trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2007-01-05T00:32:29+09:00
Subject: Re: Little Things


dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
> Hi --
>
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Trans wrote:
>
> >
> > dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
> >> Hi --
> >>
> >> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Rob Sanheim wrote:
> >>
> >>> If a ruby newbie tried "send" and saw it fail due to a private method,
> >>> I bet once they saw "send!" in the docs or in irb they would
> >>> immediately know how it works.  Its aligns perfectly with many other
> >>> things in the std lib, and fits perfectly with POLS.
> >>
> >> I'll add that if a nuby tries "send", said nuby had better realize
> >> that it is using a fairly powerful technique and would be well advised
> >> to educate itself fully about it.
> >
> > True for "instance sending" (eg funcall/send!/etc.), but is #send
> > really all that? Isn't it just a dynamic dot? If what you say is true
> > then why not:
> >
> >  obj.call! message
> >
> > and
> >
> >  obj.fcall! message
>
> I'm afraid I don't follow at all.
>
> > And extrapolating over the whole board of Ara's Pervasives:
> >
> >  id!
> >  class!
> >  methods!
> >  ...etc...
> >
> > "!" means powerful!
>
> It means "dangerous", and I'm not sure what a dangerous id or class
> method would be.

I was just taking what you said to mean the #send itself was in the
"dangerous" group. maybe I miss read you. but taking that as basis, i
then though it's not really all that "dangerous", so I brought the idea
of "!" down a notch to meet it.

And it serves an extra needed purpose: adding a "!" helps overt
over-rides. So "!" would get the added distiction of "don't override"
in addition to "in place" and "dangerous".

I'm not advocating this neccessarily btw (I think '!''s are ugly). I'm
just exrapolating.

T.