Prev: [ANN] Harvested 0.3.0
Next: Google Wave: A new type of "Ruby Quiz" ?
From: Josh Cheek on 12 Apr 2010 16:31
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Intransition <transfire(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> > it's nicer to see true/false in the output.
>
> At other times you might want to see the underlying attribute. It's
> easier to write '!!obj.safe?' then it is to write
> 'obj.instance_eval{ @safe }'.
>
> I can understand wanting it either way depending on the situation. But
> for an attr method I think it's probably best to side on doing less
> rather than more, i.e. just making :a? a normal reader. But I wouldn't
> bemoan it working one way or the other really.
>
>
You could define

save= , the setter for @safe
safe , the getter for @safe
safe? , returns !!safe

Then you can use whichever makes the most sense for your particular use.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: [ANN] Harvested 0.3.0
Next: Google Wave: A new type of "Ruby Quiz" ?