Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> He might have his own version of Ruby with method combination, it's my
> responsibility to define Ruby2 behavior:

Of course.

By the way, I didn't intend any insult or impropriety by asking
this of Guy. I know that you are the ultimate authority, but I
thought that this had perhaps been well-discussed among others
without my knowing.

Frankly, Matz, I feel a little guilty every time I ask you a
question; because I know that every minute you spend answering
that type of question is a minute that you are not spending on
more important matters.

> |2. If they do stack, is it possible to redefine a method as we
> |are used to doing? Or will that simply add a new wrapper?
> 
> Re-defining primary method (method without :pre, :post, or :wrap)
> replaces old primary methods.

Since I have already opened this issue, I will clarify by asking
two more specific questions:

1. If I want to redefine a "secondary" method (or whatever I should
call it), can I do so? It seems that an attempt to redefine
foo:pre would simply add a new foo:pre.

2. If the primary method is redefined, do the "secondary" methods
get cancelled? Or do they simply remain in place?

As always, thanks for your time, and thanks for Ruby...

Hal