From: Keith Rarick <kr@...>
Date: 2007-09-01T03:27:55+09:00
Subject: Re: python-style decorators

On 8/31/07, Trans <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
> However, even though I think such a change is a good thing to pursue

That sounds good to me. It would easily solve this problem and make
many other things possible.

> (I'm even tempted to revive Suby just to offer this one distinct
> feature), I offer this:
>
> [snip]
>
> Honestly, I half-expect I'm delusional, b/c I'm not sure how this
> manges to work, but it seems to do so. Maybe you can use it as a
> jumping board.

That almost works! See why:

class X

  class Foo

    def initialize(klass)
      @klass = klass
      @x = 5
    end

    def singleton_method_added(meth)
      return if meth == :singleton_method_added
      m = method(meth)
      @klass.send(:define_method, meth, m.to_proc)
    end
  end

  def initialize
    @x = 3
  end

  def self.fooized
    @foo ||= Foo.new(self)
  end

  def fooized.try
    10 + @x
  end

end

p X.new.try

If try were really bound to the instance of X, this would produce 13.
But it produces 15.

I was going to try dumping the method object with the Marshal module
as a roundabout way of getting the source code, but that doesn't work
either.

kr