On Monday 05 June 2006 5:39 am, Pat Maddox wrote:

> This obviously just returns the name of any method that doesn't exist
> for the object.  So if you can send the object any message and get a
> result, why doesn't it respond_to those messages?

Think about it from an implementation perspective.  How is respond_to? to know 
what method_missing is going to do?

If you define a method_missing method, and you need your object's respond_to? 
to reflect your method_missing magic, it is up to you to write a respond_to 
method that will do so.


Kirk Haines