From: Aredridel <aredridel@...>
Date: 2003-08-16T12:02:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Overloading ()


--=-3y9vXRkQCZ7it901IjV+
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 16:54, Dave Benjamin wrote:
> "Austin Ziegler" <austin@halostatue.ca> wrote in message
> news:2003814162351.292849@PADD...
> > Because () isn't really an operator -- at least not yet, and I don't kn=
ow
> > whether or not Matz will make it an operator. I'm not sure whether I'd
> want
> > it to be an operator. Maybe Matz can make it so that the [] syntactic
> sugar
> > for Proc can work with () as well.
>=20
> I think I'm really asking the wrong question here. What I'd really like t=
o
> know about is "callable objects". The () is a syntactical construct that =
has
> a different meaning in Ruby than in Python. In Ruby, () is optional. But
> this isn't what I'm really asking. I'm asking how one might make an objec=
t
> in Ruby behave like a method.

That's something I'd been wondering -- it came as a surprise to me that
all methods aren't first-class objects.  Of course, I was used to
needing to pass method handles around from all my time spent in PHP, and
since using Ruby, haven't needed that even once.

I think the biggest thing is that methods-as-objects, or lambdas as
objects are a functional programming artifact, which doesn't mesh with
OO very well at times.  I think this is one of those cases.

Ari

--=-3y9vXRkQCZ7it901IjV+
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/PZ6stP09exA3hooRAllpAKCUk2V09VwmVMlKryYAWdLnsi6v3wCgr7wQ
E3FZ8VpVKZwf4bP2f3Y2QiU=
=CIUf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-3y9vXRkQCZ7it901IjV+--