From: Andrea Maschio <andrea.maschio@...>
Date: 2007-08-02T16:27:41+09:00
Subject: Re: Dynamic method call

------=_Part_22173_29741774.1186039665412
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Ok, Gregory, now i understand that i didn't explain very well. The only part
in wich the user (let's say a VERY junior programmer) is the scripting
interface i provide for him, so he will write
if_is_true(a_condition, "do_something(arg1,arg2)")

tha internal implementation is my matter, but if you think eval is bad (i
probably understand why), the solution with

send(:method,arg1,arg2)

is probably good, but how can i allow a user to input the method name with
his arguments? Anyway, i'm going to try.

2007/8/1, Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown@gmail.com>:
>
> On 8/1/07, Andrea Maschio <andrea.maschio@gmail.com> wrote:
> > the problem is that method_name is a static call, i need to make it
> dynamic
> > and choosed by the user/programmer, so at least he should type
> > eval("method_name(arg1,arg2)") if condition
> >
> > but my aim was just to encapsulate this in a more comprehensible grammar
> > like
> >
> > if_it_happens_that(is_true, "do_something(arg1,arg2)")
> >
> > in another language that english it sound more different using english
> word
> > "like if, then, end, do"
> >
> > i know it could sound weird, but this was my need, and i solved it with
> eval
> > (of course the internal logic is far more complex)
>
> I still don't quite understand the problem you're tring to solve, but
> consider using send(:method,arg1,arg2) instead of eval().  You're
> begging for a mess using eval() to allow end users to input stuff.
>
>


-- 

Andrea Maschio

http://www.superandrew.it

A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it.

Einstein

------=_Part_22173_29741774.1186039665412--