Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

`UndefinedMethodError` perhaps? that way we can restore the distinction between method declaration (which assigns a name, within some namespace) and method definition/implementation which gives the function its ability.


Wouldn't that be too similar to NoMethodError? I recently came across the idiom in Smalltalk, where you would call subclassResponsibility:

    someMethod:
      self subclassResponsibility
I've suggested the name in the ruby bug tracker issue here:

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18915


linguistically speaking, no method means the name isn’t even known, which isn’t the case here. the name exists and is known (after a successful declaration). what’s missing is the actual definition. if we lean heavily into language, perhaps only undefined method will do.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: