From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2010-09-07T00:22:32+09:00
Subject: Re: Odd functional programming question

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Peter Hickman
<peterhickman386@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 6 September 2010 15:52, Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Actually I'd say _this_ definition of X is completely superfluous
>> since it does not add anything to #send and so only helps obfuscate
>> code and slows down execution.
>
> It was just a dummy method to get a feel how the code would be used.
> What I am using it for is a method to compare two pieces of data with
> a variety of optional preprocessing. This way I can put the
> preprocessing (of which there could be several variants) in an array,
> as [ :gsub, /[aeiouy/, '_' ] etc, and iterate over the data and the
> preprocessors and get the fitness scores out of the X method.
>
> I will mean that I have one X method rather than X1, X2 ... Xn which
> are all just minor variations on X.

Where do you take the sequence of operations from?  Maybe it's simpler
(but certainly more efficient) to just load a Ruby file and execute
the code fetched from there.  Or use evil #eval to compile the code
for later execution.  You could then store it in a lambda and execute
it from there.

Kind regards

robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/