Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!talisker.lacave.net!lacave.net!not-for-mail
From: Fearless Fool <r@alum.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
Subject: Re: looking for an "inversion" pattern
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:40:45 -0500
Organization: Service de news de lacave.net
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <9781d8dfa4b6039362d09f98e7b7036e@ruby-forum.com>
References: <d0c168880ff1c65dd84fc6d70778ddb2@ruby-forum.com> <7c9986702d2a6acd3748e6cca228d8da@ruby-forum.com> <BANLkTikFjzEuhMevuXJ6ZGSHA6h=MNTnjA@mail.gmail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bristol.highgroove.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-printable
X-Trace: talisker.lacave.net 1302882072 12625 65.111.164.187 (15 Apr 2011 15:41:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@lacave.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:41:12 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikFjzEuhMevuXJ6ZGSHA6h=MNTnjA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Received-From: This message has been automatically forwarded from the ruby-talk mailing list by a gateway at comp.lang.ruby. If it is SPAM, it did not originate at comp.lang.ruby. Please report the original sender, and not us. Thanks! For more details about this gateway, please visit: http://blog.grayproductions.net/categories/the_gateway
X-Mail-Count: 381641
X-Ml-Name: ruby-talk
X-Rubymirror: Yes
X-Ruby-Talk: <9781d8dfa4b6039362d09f98e7b7036e@ruby-forum.com>
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.ruby:2949

Thanks everybody!!

@Jes=C3=BAs:

I like your suggestion.  It is simple and does what I'm looking for.

@Robert K:
> I am sorry, I still do not understand your motivation to have a class
> method which receives an instance as first argument.

My motivation is that I was writing a lot of code like this:

module HasXattr
    def xattr_reference(key);  Xattr.xattr_reference(self, key); end
    def xattr_store(key, value); Xattr.xattr_store(self, key, value); =

end
    def xattr_has_key?(key); Xattr.xattr_has_key?(self, key); end
    def xattr_delete(key); Xattr.xattr_delete(self, key); end
    ...
end

.. and I thought to myself: this is Ruby.  There must be a better way. =

I guess I should have shown this concrete example earlier in the thread.

@Kevin:
> One of the problems with Ruby is that the syntax changes depending on
> the compile-time or run-time context, which is a totally arbitrary
> distinction.

As I said, I came from a scheme background where everything was =

syntactically simple and life was simple.   Ah, for those days.  I guess =

I should have said "that's mighty fine Ruby-fu", since your =

understanding of Ruby far outstrips mine.

Again, thanks all...

- ff

-- =

Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.=