From: "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Date: 2003-12-14T16:27:50+09:00
Subject: Re: inplace assignment

On Sunday 14 December 2003 07:49 am, Hal Fulton wrote:
> OK, I thought that was what you meant.
>
> String also has a replace. But there's no general Object#replace.
>
> My impression is that this in impossible in general, and for
> immediate values such as Fixnums, "even more impossible."
>
> The idea of doing this with a constant is scary to me. It's bad
> enough that a constant String or Array can be changed. And it's
> even scarier to think of doing that with something like a
> Fixnum.
>
> What's the situation where you'd want to do this?

Well, the reason its a constant is b/c its a class. It's funny how things come 
up. I only recently learned that when you modify a class, all previously 
defined objects of that class are effected. But what if you want to pull the 
entire "rug out", so to speak, and replace a class with a "duck similiar" 
class?

Okay, so it's a bit crazy. But I actually came across a use for this. Luckly 
my situation is specialized --I am replacing the class with a subclass of it, 
so I discovered that I could just do this:

  class MyClass < MyClass

(and now that I think about it I can probably do this for any calss) it seems 
to work fine.

but now i'm running into an disturbing problem. next post...

-- 
T.