From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2008-03-24T06:30:05+09:00
Subject: Re: #meta

On 23.03.2008 13:05, Trans wrote:
> On Mar 23, 7:19 am, Robert Klemme <shortcut...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 
>> So then the only (?) advantage of your proposal is that you can use
>> private methods like ordinary methods.
>>
>>> There's no need for meta at all, you could just use "class << self"
>>> directly,
> 
> Well, yea.
> 
> Wait a minute... could we set the methods we're interested in here to
> protected instead of private?  And, as you suggest, just use the
> singleton class?
> 
>   >> def singleton
>   >>   class<<self;self;end
>   >> end
>   => nil
>   >> class Module
>   >>   protected :attr_accessor
>   >> end
>   => Module
>   >> class X
>   >>   singleton.attr_accessor :x
>   >> end
>   => nil
>   >> X.x
>   => nil
>   >> X.attr_accessor :y
>   NoMethodError: protected method `attr_accessor' called for X:Class
>           from (irb):11
> 
> Looks good!!! Not sure why this never occurred to me before. See
> anything wrong with this approach?

At the moment the only thing that bothers me is to change the visibility 
of some methods of the core lib.  I mean, they must be restricted for a 
reason...

Kind regards

	robert