On Jan 28, 2:11 am, Marnen Laibow-Koser <li...@ruby-forum.com> wrote: > Frederick Cheung wrote in post #978021: > [...] > > > I seem to recall that > > historically, although method_missing etc was overriden to add dynamic > > methods, respond_to wasn't, which didn't make AR a very good citizen, > > which may be why this works with projects using old versions of rails > > How is that possible? respond_to? shouldn't need to be overridden to > take method_missing into account, should it?
The default implementation of respond_to? doesn't know that although a method (like a attribute accessor) doesn't exist yet, if you were to call it then method_missing would create it, so respond_to would return false, even though you would be able to call the method. Need is a vague word. At a basic level you don't need to override respond_to, however there was a strong enough feeling that this wasn't consistent, especially as you'd do things lile foo.respond_to? :name #=> false foo.name #=> 'Bob' foo.respond_to? :name #=> true Fred > > > > > Fred > > Best, > -- > Marnen Laibow-Koserhttp://www.marnen.org > mar...@marnen.org > > Sent from my iPhone > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
