On 7/31/07, ara.t.howard <ara.t.howard / gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 31, 2007, at 12:09 PM, Pit Capitain wrote:
>
> > 2007/7/31, ara.t.howard <ara.t.howard / gmail.com>:
> >> i was playing with this last night, thought some here might be
> >> interested:
> >>
> >>    http://drawohara.tumblr.com/post/7241442
> >
> > Hi Ara, since I don't know the implementation of Rails'
> > alias_method_chain, I can't comment on which is better, so just a few
> > remarks concerning your code:
> >
> > * Syntax: like ±Ơienne, I, too, don't like that it is necessary to
> > repeat the method name in both the #redefining call and the method
> > definition. Couldn't you just call #redefining without an argument and
> > look in the new module which methods have been defined there?
> >
> > * Implementation: I haven't checked in detail, but I think you could
> > get problems with the class variable when there's a class hierarchy.
> >
> > * Implementation: currently, the method chains are only used as a flag
> > whether to create the "initial" module or not. Do you plan to use it
> > for other things? Otherwise you don't need an array with all the
> > intermediate modules.
> >
> > Btw. nice use of the BEGIN block!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Pit
> >
>
>
> updated:
>
>    http://drawohara.tumblr.com/post/7241442
>
> i played some cannot seem to come up with a way to avoid having the
> stack of modules and also maintain super semantics across multiple
> invocations - anyone else have a go?
>
>
> a @ http://drawohara.com/
> --
> we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being
> better. simply reflect on that.
> h.h. the 14th dalai lama
>
>
>
>
>
Wow can you read my mind :), you fixed it already!! Very impressive
technique, but what a pain...

Robert

-- 
[...] as simple as possible, but no simpler.
-- Attributed to Albert Einstein