[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

13 messages 2000/10/02

[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

OK, here is what I think I know.

14 messages 2000/10/11

[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

18 messages 2000/10/11
[#5427] RE: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — OZAWA -Crouton- Sakuro <crouton@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,

[#5429] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...> 2000/10/11

Thanks for the input.

[#5432] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,

[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:

80 messages 2000/10/13
[#5531] Re: Some newbye question — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2000/10/14

Hi,

[#5544] Re: Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...> 2000/10/15

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#5576] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2000/10/16

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:

[#5617] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2000/10/16

Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:

[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>

There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about

16 messages 2000/10/20
[#5712] Re: Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...> 2000/10/20

Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:

[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>

Hello fellow rubyists,

21 messages 2000/10/26

[ruby-talk:5328] Re: Redefining super method as singleton?

From: Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
Date: 2000-10-09 07:08:54 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5328
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> |Say I have something similar to:
> |
> |class Super
> |  def m
> |    print "Super#m\n"
> |  end
> |end
> |
> |class Sub < Super
> |  def m
> |    super
> |    print "Sub#m\n"
> |  end
> |end
> |
> |s = Sub.new
> |
> |and want to redefine Super#m (as a singelton method?) in s. Is it
> |possible?
> 
> class Super
>   def m
>     print "Super#m\n"
>   end
> end
> 
> class Sub < Super
>   def m
>     super
>     print "Sub#m\n"
>   end
> end
> 
> s = Sub.new
> 
> def s.m
>   super
>   print "s.m\n"
> end
> s.m
> 
# -> "Super#m\nSub#m\ns.m\n"

But I want something like

# -> "Super#new_m\nSub#m\n"

Without having to redefine m in Super for all instances of Sub.

Sorry for not describing it better.

/Robert


In This Thread