From: Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Date: 2011-01-27T06:49:13+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby treatment of method defs


On Jan 26, 2011, at 12:33 , James Byrne wrote:

> In the ruby language if I do this:
> 
> def g=( value )
>  @gval = value.to_s
> end
> 
> def g
>  @gval
> end
> 
> g = 12
> 
> Then g == 12, @gval == nil and g.class == Fixnum
> 
> I realize that this has to do with the way Ruby processes undefined
> identifiers at runtime.  However, it strikes me that it is fundamentally
> wrong to ignore an existing explicit method declaration within the
> current scope in favour of creating a locally scoped variable instead.
> This behaviour is counter-intuitive and the ugly work-around required
> (self.g = 12) only accentuates how out of place it is.

    def x
      g = 12
    end

g= is "in scope" as you put it. Which should it be? local assignment or method call?

    require 'g'
    
    def x
      g = 12
    end

how about now?

Does your answer change? If so, why?