Ilias Lazaridis said the following on 4/19/2005 9:37 PM:
Ruby's nonstandard notation has not very much relevance to me.
But let's see your definitions:
(Object) = "the singleton class of the class object Object"
Object = ?
Ilias,
Do you not know what "Object" is in Ruby? And you are trying to create
a model to correct what was designed by Matz--the creator of Ruby?
Please, stop trying to compare Ruby to your "fictive language" until you
first read the Ruby documentation.
ri Object states . . .
---------------------------------------------------------- Class: Object
+Object+ is the parent class of all classes in Ruby. Its methods
are therefore available to all objects unless explicitly
overridden.
+Object+ mixes in the +Kernel+ module, making the built-in kernel
functions globally accessible. Although the instance methods of
+Object+ are defined by the +Kernel+ module, we have chosen to
document them here for clarity.
In the descriptions of Object's methods, the parameter _symbol_
refers to a symbol, which is either a quoted string or a +Symbol+
(such as +:name+).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm curious.
Does your [EVALUATION] have a purpose?
Is there an audience for it? Or are you just doing this as an exercise?
Many others have suggested material you could read to understand Ruby
better. They've suggested that you write some code to see how Ruby
really works. Instead, you expend abundant amounts of time and energy
trying to get others to review your material, and then dismiss honest
attempts to help you learn what you do not know.
Read the Ruby documentation, and evaluate your own "evaluation"--or else
just give up and try to create a "fictive" model of assembly language.
[now back to my lurking]
Regards,
Mark Smith mailto:mas.lists[at]cox.net
================================================================
A: Yes.
================================================================
