From: Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Date: 2003-11-22T23:44:56+09:00
Subject: Re: Method wrapper question (was "stereotyping (was ...))

On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 11:15:04PM +0900, Christoph wrote:
> ts wrote:
> ...
> >  Yes, and this is why I prefer this scheme to
> > 
> >    class A
> >       def a:pre
> >       end
> > 
> >       def a:pre
> >       end
> > 
> >       def a
> >       end
> >    end            
> 
> Agreed 100% - I see no reason for allowing several hooks
> in the same class.

I could see a reason. Imagine the following scenario (monitors):

  class A

    def a:pre
      # my own pre-wrapper
    end

    synchronize :a    # defines a:pre and a:post

    def a
      # critical section
    end

  end  

The implementation of sychronize has to do ugly method aliasing stuff,
and depending on the order you define your own a:pre (e.g. putting the
synchronize before it), the monitor-code gets overwritten.

Regards,

  Michael