Some languages draw hard distinctions between "methods", "functions",
"subroutines", etc., but Ruby's much more laid-back than that. You'll
notice a similar sort of looseness with @ and @@ variables, which can
act differently if they're declared at a global scope than if they're
declared within a class or method definition.

(Now, if you get seriously into Ruby's more functional aspects you'll
have to learn the differences between procs and lambdas, but you can
still do a lot without learning that stuff.)

Francis

"Imobach GonzáÍez Sosa" <imodev / softhome.net> wrote in message news:<200402141220.14464.imobachgs / softhome.net>...
> Hi all,
> 
> I've got a little curiosity about defining methods. As far as I know (and
> maybe I'm wrong) functions doesn't exist in Ruby... right? Ruby only have
> methods.
> 
> However, I can do this:
> 
> <code>
> #!/usr/bin/env ruby
> 
> def test
> 	puts "This is a test"
> end
> 
> test
> </code>
> 
> If test is really a method... what class it belongs to? Or is it a function
> and I've missed something?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> PD: OK, I know, I'm more worried about conceptual point of view that I'd must
> be ;-)
> 
> -- 
> (o_.'   Imobach GonzáÍez Sosa   imobachgs / softhome.net
> //\c{}  imobachgs / step.es       a2419 / dis.ulpgc.es
> V__)_   imodev / softhome.net     osoh en jabber.at y jabber.org
>         Usuario Linux #201634
> Debian GNU/Linux `Sarge' con nù¨leo 2.4.24 sobre Intel Pentium 4
> 
> La buena y verdadera amistad no debe ser sospechosa en nada.
> 		-- Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra. (1547-1616) Escritor españïl.