> On 12/21/06, Julien Gaugaz <gaugaz / l3s.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > Julien Gaugaz wrote:
>> >> Hi!
>> >>
>> >> It's several hours now that i'm trying to find out what's special 
>> with
>> >> *** for a method name, without success :(
>> >
>> > That should be your clue. There _isn't_ anything special about "***",
>> > whereas the infix operators that exist in Ruby that you can redefine
>> > require special treatment by the interpreter. You can't expand the set
>> > of operators, and '***' isn't among them.
>> Ah, ok, thanks a lot. I understood why i could use '***' as an infix
>> operator. But still, there shouldn't be any difference between a call
>> like m.*** n  and m.triple_star n... But it seems there is since
>> m.triple_star works and m.*** don't.
>>
>> I don't get it.
>>
>
> The basic problem is that ** is right-associative, and * is
> left-associative.  The existing grammar can't resolve the apparent
> conflict.
Ah ok! I get it!!!! :-D Thanks a lot!
> Also, *** is unreadably nasty, so it's good that you can't name a
> method that. :)
:-)
I found it ok compared to ===. But if the interpreter can't read it...
>
>