From: Ilan Berci Date: 2007-04-03T06:41:10+09:00 Subject: Re: New presentation on Ruby Gavin Kistner wrote: > On Apr 2, 3:20 pm, Ilan Berci wrote: >> Slide 22) If "top level functions" are "private" methods of class >> Object, there would be no way to call them without a receiver which is >> simply not the case > > I think you have that backwards. Private methods *cannot* be called > with an explicit receiver: > Doh! ofcourse, my bad.. I will pray to the ruby gods and ask for forgiveness (and for one f*#$#ing job in my local area) > >> Slide 24) Point about attributes only allowed to be defined within their >> class definition is wrong. In ruby I can define one almost anywhere >> with Object::instance_variable_set or Module::module_eval. >> >> Slide 26) Who are you to say what "private" means. Each class has their >> own definition and either could be viewed as the truth. Given that, I >> can still access private methods in a class by going through send() so >> your statement is not correct > > IMO both of the above slides are correct. Just because Ruby lets you > do crazy things (break encapsulation by reaching 'inside' via > instance_eval or send) doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and function > well. > > >> Slide 53) Subjective to the point of insanity.. Agreed.. I officially retract > > Now now, be nice :) Kisses! ilan -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.