From: Sean Russell <ser@...>
Date: 2001-11-05T00:31:55+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:24327] Re: RCR: Fun with attribute shortcuts solves RCR #3 and more

Dan Schmidt wrote:

> Perhaps the generated initialize method could also check for the
> presence of a initialize_more (or a better name, hopefully) method
> and call it if it exists.
> 
> That way you could set a bunch of member variables automatically, and
> then continue by doing other initialization such as setting other
> derived variables.

Yeah, this would be important.  It would be good not to change the original 
initialization naming scheme, though, and provide an auto-aliasing 
mechanisem.  Although it would introduce a sequence dependability, I was 
thinking about something like this:

  # Gunnar's attr_initialize code, up to class_eval, then...
  if defined? initialize
    init_code = "alias :__initialize_more__ :initialize
      def initialize(#{plist})
        #{alist} = #{plist}
        __initialize_more__
      end"
  else
    init_code = "def initialize(#{plist}); #{alist} = #{plist}; end"
  end
  class_eval init_code
  # ... then the rest of the ends


You'd have to define your classes in such a way that your initialize() 
comes before your attr_initializer statement.  Maybe there's a way around 
this.  Anyway, doing it would mean only introducing one new concept 
(attr_initializer) rather than two (attr_initializer and initialize_more).

--- SER


-----=  Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News  =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
 Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers!  ==-----