The last of which is inconsistently named. I propose that we deprecate this method and create a new one called const_unset (as it's the counterpart to const_set).
The last of which is inconsistently named. I propose that we deprecate
this method and create a new one called const_unset (as it's the
counterpart to const_set).
I understand that it's a dangerous operation but how does naming it inconsistently make any less so other than making it difficult to find in the documentation? The fact that it's a private method I would think should be protection enough from accidental usage.
matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote:
remove is a dangerous operation, thus named inconsistent, as remove_instance_variable etc.
(Sorry for the duplicate post, this one can be deleted)
kyledecot (Kyle Decot) wrote:
I understand that it's a dangerous operation but how does naming it inconsistently make any less so other than making it difficult to find in the documentation? The fact that it's a private method I would think should be protection enough from accidental usage.
matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote:
remove is a dangerous operation, thus named inconsistent, as remove_instance_variable etc.
Updated by 
Updated by Anonymous 
Updated by 
Updated by