Hi,

At Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:39:15 +0900,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote in [ruby-core:19769]:
> I think we have to address some issues:
> 
> * the name.  In Ruby, unlike Java, we rarely use the verb get for
>   method names.  We prefer foo to get_foo, when foo can be considered
>   as an attribute.  But in this case, args instead of get_args sounds
>   bit weird to me.
> 
> * there is name-less rest argument (a, b, *), which just ignores the
>   rest arguments.  I think we have give some meaningful value for that
>   case too.
> 
> * 1.9 added mandatory argument at the bottom of argument list (after
>   rest argument *, just before block argument &).  We have to address
>   this in the returning tuple.

* how to represent default arguments. They can be arbitrary
  expressions not only simple literals, for instance,
  preceeding parameters can be there, and any (parenthesized)
  statements e.g. if, case, while, class, and etc.

  And as 1.9 merges bytecodes of those expressions into the
  method body, so I don't think it's possible to discompile.

-- 
Nobu Nakada