I like your summary.

> The pluralization thing has too much potential for collision and looks
> jarring (to_as looks to me like "to" "as", which doesn't make any
> sense; then again I'm not a fan of programmatic pluralization for any
> reason, since it's very western-language-centric and far from
> foolproof (moose? virus? fish?)).

I agree that you shouldn't use it if the resulting code makes no sense 
or might cause conflicts. If I've got an array of ActiveRecords that 
have a name field, then calling @list.names to return an array of names 
still seems to be readable and conflictless imo.

> The magic dot has a potential to create scads more objects to handle
> the adapting. With a magic dot, list.map.to_i necessarily has to
> create some adapter object for the call to map so there's a receiver
> for to_i where no object was required before. Unless Ruby is adding a
> pretty powerful GC in the future, perhaps we should avoid adding tons
> of transient objects just for the magic dot.

Perhaps the proxy could be associated with the class and reused?

> The magic underscore has far less potential to cause a collision and
> requires no intermediate objects to be created. And as others have
> mentioned, it's been proven to look and feel really nice by
> ActiveRecord.

I like this a lot too.

#1 and #3 are currently available in the .rb file on my blog page for 
anyone finding this thread.

Nic

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.