At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,
Jon Babcock <jon / kanji.com> wrote:
> 
> Does it mean something like, "If, due to the nature of C, there is no
> need for this function, then there is also no need to take in the 2nd
> and 3rd arguments." ?  Just a guess.

close.  but not right. i don't know what 'this function' in the above
sentense pointing to, but the original is talking not about
rb_iterate() but func2().

func2 takes

- value from yield as 1st argument
- data2 as 2nd
- self as 3rd

as you can see, func2 is just a pointer to function, so it doesn't
matter to pass either

VALUE func2_with_three_arg(VALUE from_yield, VALUE data2, VALUE self);

or

VALUE func2_with_only_one_arg(VALUE from_yield);

to rb_iterate()'s 3rd arg.

and that is the nature/characteristic/feature/or-whatever-you-call of C.

so I rephrase your's as

"If, due to the nature of C, there is no need for *func2* to take the
2nd and 3rd arguments."

hope i got it right ;)
--
            yashi