From: Rich Kilmer <rich@...>
Date: 2002-09-27T13:30:33+09:00
Subject: RE: adding overload to ruby

again I would write:

def do_foo(b<sort,bar>)
  #used when b should respond to sort and bar
end

def do_foo(b<String>)
  #used when b should be a type/subsclass of String
end

but I don't think Ruby needs to use these 'signatures', it could just be
better documentation on the methods (and the intent of how the method
will use the parameters).

-rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yukihiro Matsumoto [mailto:matz@ruby-lang.org] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 7:16 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: adding overload to ruby
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: adding overload to ruby"
>     on 02/09/27, Mauricio =?unknown-8bit?Q?Fern=E1ndez?= 
> <batsman.geo@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> |One foolish way I can think of would be the following:
> |
> |def do_foo<sort,bar>(b)
> |# used when b can respond to sort and bar
> |end
> 
> I like the *concept* of this idea.
> 
> 							matz.
>