From: ts <decoux@...>
Date: 2002-04-13T21:18:34+09:00
Subject: Re: Idea for a new shorthand

>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:

P> Hmm, I see.  On the one hand, I shouldn't be able to call a method that
P> has been disabled in the derived class.  On the other hand, though,

   or if this method was redefined, you have the same problem if I write

      class Derived < Base; def foo; puts "Derived#foo"; end; end;

 The #bind will call Base#foo when d.foo will call Derived#foo

 Difficult to explain why the same object can call 2 differents methods
 when you send the same message.

P> has been disabled in the derived class.  On the other hand, though,
P> being able to do this would be VERY useful (I could call a method in my
P> base class's base class, if I needed to).

 Can you give an example for this, because your first example can be
 written 

  class Base; def foo; puts "Base#foo"; end; end;
  class Derived < Base; end
  d = Derived.new
  Derived.instance_method(:foo).bind(d).call()



Guy Decoux