On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Dave Thomas wrote:

> Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was meaning that you'd probably disappoint
> some people whichever way you implemented it (name or body).
> 
> Possible way round it would be to implement Method#codeHash and
> Method#name, so you could say
> 
>    m1.codeHash == m2.codeHash
> 
> or
> 
>    m1.name == m2.name
> 
> 
> That way the developer gets control.
> 
That's what I mean to. Is this a RCR?

/Robert

Ps. Freudian slip in using codeHash vs code_hash, Dave? :-)