From: Peter <Peter.Vanbroekhoven@...>
Date: 2003-11-28T07:45:44+09:00
Subject: Re: Method wrapping

> That was my reading of Matz announcement at least for
> the arity part.  Personally I don't see a need for matching
> default arguments (in fact any default arguments) since
> they could be automatically supplied by the primary method
> but you have ask Matz for the definite opinion.

My point was about something like this:

  def foo(a,b,c=3)
    blah
  end

  def foo:wrap(a,b)
    blah blah
    super
  end

Is foo:wrap invalid or not? If it is, I assume the following foo:wrap is
valid, right?

  def foo:wrap(a,b,c)
    blah blah
    super
  end

Either way, we loose the parameter with the default value, either because
it's always 5 or because we always have to specify a value. Only way is to
repeat the default value in foo:wrap. Unless there's special behavior for
wrapping methods somewhere.

Peter