From: Tom Sawyer <transami@...>
Date: 2002-07-24T00:52:46+09:00
Subject: Re: define_method with super in the proc

On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 09:32, David Alan Black wrote:
> I'm losing sight of the goal here.  What's the advantage of this kind
> of indirectness and extra work, when you can just write the code?
> 
>   class B < A
>     def doit
>       super
>       @y = 10
>     end
>   end
> 
> Normally I would assume that a small example is encapsulating
> something that one would want to do one a larger scale, but I'm not
> sure what that would be here.  (By "here" I mean the question raised
> in the whole thread, not just this example.)

well here's my code (slight out of date now). you'll notice i have super
remarked out, and i'm just redefining the the method. but like i said i
don't know how this works exactly in some cases, i.e. when the method is
an assignment (#x=). (i didn't include any of the widget classes this
draws upon, but you can imagine)

    # Widget Factory
    #   Returns a new widget object of specialized widget class
    def WidgetFactory.new(widget, bindings={}, attributes={})
      
      # a string name will work too
      widget = widget.intern if widget.is_a?(String)
       
      # makes an anoynomous class as subclass of desired widget
      widgetClass = Class.new(WidgetFactory.const_get(widget))
       
      # specialize class via bindings
      bindings.each do |k, v|
        widgetClass.class_eval {
          define_method(k) { |*args|
	    #super
            v[0].send(v[1], *args)
          }
        }
      end
        
      return widgetClass.new(attributes)
      
    end

so you see i'm sort of dynamically creating classes. does that help?

-- 
~transami