From: ThoML <micathom@...>
Date: 2008-02-24T17:44:54+09:00
Subject: Re: Monkeypatching is Destroying Ruby

> I want this:
>
>   module MyModule
>     class ::String
>        def inspect
>           return 'shock the monkey'
>        end
>     end
>   end
>
> I want .inspect, or whatever, outside my module, to behave normally.

If ruby had a package/module system with import/export where constants
could be renamed and assigned for a specific set of code ... well.
Such a system would be tricky to manage though due to all classes
being open. Nothing stops you from adding a new method later on and it
could sometimes be difficult (or rather non-intuitive) to determine
whether the class X in that method should be the real class X or class
Y that was assigned to X in the import statement of such a module.

Anyway, you could also rewrite (live/hot/monkey patch, whoahoo!)
String#inspect to check if the caller belongs to your module. If I'm
not mistaken, ruby19 provides means to detect who/what is calling a
method.

I'd rather subclass String though, since this special use should be
restricted to a well-defined module.

But what should happen in your proposal if a method returns such a
special string and something outside the module calls inspect?

BTW I don't think the python community originally frowned upon MP. I
can remember a self-proclaimed python expert who once explained with
sparkling eyes the merits of MP to a young newcomer. I cannot remember
the slightest trace of doubt and this already happened a few years
ago.

Regards,
Thomas.