From: UpsNDowns <tnospamhomas@...>
Date: 2008-02-19T03:59:56+09:00
Subject: Re: object specific methods and id

Hi Gary,

Gary Wright wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure why you keep switching the point of view (current  
> implementation, possible alternate implementation, language-level).   
> I've been writing in the context of what a Ruby programmer is able to  
> see not what an implementer can or might be able to see.
> 
Well for three reasons. The premier is that Im confused about this and 
hence lack a clear-cut view of things and in effect grab onto every 
straw, that appears helpful at the moment.

Another is (or rather was I suppose) that I was unable to find a more 
formal/precise specification of what ruby is (it may exist but I haven't 
  found it). Also, I came across webpages claiming that ruby doesn't 
have such a formal specification. If this is true then ruby is defined 
by what the current implementation does (this may change once I get the 
ruby-way internalised, I suppose).

The final reason was to try to discover the boundary between the ruby 
programmer and the VM. Eg to answer questions like the following: it's 
possible to 'overwrite' the class method, but does that change the 
methods/messages that an object implements, if not why, if it does why?

I really appreciate your (and the rest of posters) help.

Kind regards.