il Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:15:37 +0900, "Sean O'Dell" <sean / celsoft.com> ha
scritto::

>On Friday 04 June 2004 18:34, nobu.nokada / softhome.net wrote:

>
>In both cases, does that mean that the object has hash-like functionality, or 
>just that the object responds to those two methods?  Is there some definition 
>somewhere that says "it's a hash if it has these methods?"  I actually have 
>hash-like objects that DON'T respond to either of those two methods, but it 
>would be easy enough to add fake ones.  I hate adding fake methods just to id 
>a hash interface, it's a kludge.
>
>	Sean O'Dell


why do you need to say 'it is hash like' ?
Wo'nt it be easyer to say 'I need this methods, so I'll just check
them' ?

BTW, probably the simpler solution is :

x.methods =={}.methods 
:)