On 6 Ϧ, 10:14, Robert Klemme <shortcut... / googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2011/6/5 Ilias Lazaridis <il... / lazaridis.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4 , 21:02, Robert Klemme <shortcut... / googlemail.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > There is another approach which does not suffer from the side effect of
> > [...]
>
> > Note to readers:
>
> > This approach is not usable in the given context (Altering Behaviours
> > of "each do").
>
> > The code can *possibly* altered, thus it works on Array#each.
>
> > For a solution which works exactly in the given context (Array#each),
> > see message from "James Gray" below (you can ignore all following
> > messages, they are off-topic).
>
> If you look close enough you will notice that *both* approaches work
> (or don't) the same way with regard to #each - for the same reason!

I don't have to "look close enough"

This was the original context (specification):

names = ["Jane", "Michele", "Isabella"]
# current behaviour
names.each do |name|
  print name
end
#Question: How can I alter the behaviour of "each" in the following
way:
names.each do
  print item         # "item" is used by default
end

The specification is very simple.

Your solution does not work in this context.

The solution from Gray works 100%.

If you like, you can still modify your solution to pass the
specification.

If not, feel free to setup a new context (specification), but please
use a new topic.

.

--
http://lazaridis.com