From: Dumaiu <Dymaio@...>
Date: 2007-12-09T23:46:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Thought I'd share my alias

On Nov 10, 6:28 am, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> class Module
>
>   # As with alias_method, butaliasboth reader and writer.
>   #
>   #   attr_accessor :x
>   #   self.x = 1
>   #   alias_accessor :y, :x
>   #   y #=> 1
>   #   self.y = 2
>   #   x #=> 2
>
>   def alias_accessor(*args)
>     orig = args.last
>     args = args - [orig]
>     args.each do |name|
>       alias_method(name, orig)
>       alias_method("#{name}=", "#{orig}=")
>     end
>   end
>
>   def alias_reader(*args)
>     orig = args.last
>     args = args - [orig]
>     args.each do |name|
>       alias_method(name, orig)
>     end
>   end
>
>   def alias_writer(*args)
>     orig = args.last
>     args = args - [orig]
>     args.each do |name|
>       alias_method("#{name}=", "#{orig}=")
>     end
>   end
>
> end

Okay.  I'd say shorten

>     orig = args.last
>     args = args - [orig]

to 'orig = args.pop'.

Actually, if I were using this myself I would write

	def alias_accessor(orig, first_alias, *aliases)
		aliases.unshift(first_alias)
		aliases.each ...

which is more idiomatic, I think, for variadic methods.  I don't think
imitation of alias_method()'s parameter order is worth the decrease in
elegance.