On Monday 27 September 2004 09:00 pm, trans.  (T. Onoma) wrote:
> On Monday 27 September 2004 08:49 pm, Florian Gross wrote:
> > I'm not sure about this. (Is it needed frequently?) But right now I'd
> > prefer Binding.of_caller to be in Ruby itself. After all it is needed
> > for wrapping eval() and it can not be done with a pretty interface in
> > plain Ruby. (It can be done in Ruby if you turn it inside out, e.g. make
> > it yield a value instead of returning it.)
>
> Binding.of_caller? Could you explain this more? I'm not sure to what you
> are referring.

Okay, I see. I did some research to understand. The problem I see with this is 
that it might have too large an overhead --in effect creating a binding prior 
to every method invocation. Is that so? On the other hand, I see no reason 
for 'self' of caller not to be available.

T.