From: Peter <Peter.Vanbroekhoven@...>
Date: 2003-11-27T19:45:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Method wrapping

> Basically.  I think I will prepare method handling API to operate on
> method combinations.

Just a stupid question, but wouldn't it be cleanest conceptually if a
wrapper method was given a handle - say a name like any method - such that
you can refer to each wrapper by name? Something like foo:pre:bar (I suck
at inventing cool Ruby syntax). It would be optional, but if you don't
specify it, you have to live with the wrap. And the the manipulation of
the wrapper methods is just like manipulation of the primary methods. Of
course this is my view since I can't see yet how you can make a clean API
to manipulate method stackings. Since you don't know what method on the
stack is yours, how can you identify it? Even if you are in a development
cycle and you know what you are doing... Maybe you could show the code for
the wrappers, or give line numbers where they were defined, but that's a
bit weird and different from what you can do with primary methods
currently.

Peter