From: dblack@...
Date: 2007-01-23T10:10:18+09:00
Subject: Re: Minor Change Proposal for Classes 'Object' and 'Method'

Hi --

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> In message "Re: Minor Change Proposal for Classes 'Object' and 'Method'"
>>    on Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:14:28 +0900, dblack@wobblini.net writes:
>> 
>> |I don't know, in terms of the other languages.  I don't think it's
>> |exactly analogous, though.  It's really a bound object, so
>> |bound_object would probably be the most straightforward.
>> 
>> The term 'bound_object' is not suitable for the Method object model in
>> my brain.  I want to retrieve the object corresponding to self in that
>> method.  Among your suggestions, "target" is better than bound_object.
>> But I still fond of 'receiver'.
>
> 'receiver' makes perfect sense to me.  so does 'this'.

I don't think "this" works for, ummm, this.  How would you infer that
the "this" here:

   m = obj.method(:x)
   m.this

refers to obj?  I can't think of an explanation that doesn't twist and
turn around some bends.


David

-- 
Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers?
A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black)
    (See what readers are saying!  http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf)
Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching?
A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)