Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6647427
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 26, 20262026-05-26T00:32:11+00:00 2026-05-26T00:32:11+00:00

I know that I can dynamically define methods on a class using define_method ,

  • 0

I know that I can dynamically define methods on a class using define_method, and that I specify the parameters this method takes using the arity of the block.

I want to dynamically define a method that accepts both optional parameters and a block. In Ruby 1.9, this is easy because passing a block to a block is now allowed.

Unfortunately, Ruby 1.8 doesn’t allow this, so the following won’t work:

#Ruby 1.8
class X
  define_method :foo do |bar, &baz|
    puts bar
    baz.call if block_given?
  end
end

x = X.new
x.foo("foo") { puts "called!"} #=> LocalJumpError: no block given

Replacing the explicit block.call with yield doesn’t fix the problem either.
Upgrading to Ruby 1.9 is unfortunately not an option for me. Is this an intractable problem, or is there a way around it?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-26T00:32:12+00:00Added an answer on May 26, 2026 at 12:32 am

    This works with Ruby 1.8.7, but not 1.8.6:

    class X
      define_method(:foo) do |bar, &baz|
        puts bar
        baz.call if baz
      end
    end
    

    Testing with:

    X.new.foo("No block")
    X.new.foo("With block") { puts "  In the block!"}
    p = proc {puts "  In the proc!"}
    X.new.foo("With proc", &p)
    

    gives:

    No block
    With block
      In the block!
    With proc
      In the proc!
    

    (with 1.8.6 it gives syntax error, unexpected tAMPER, expecting '|'.)

    If you want optional arguments as well as block, you could try something like this:

    class X
      define_method(:foo) do |*args, &baz|
        if args[0]
          bar = args[0]
        else
          bar = "default"
        end
        puts bar
        baz.call if baz
      end
    end
    

    testing with:

    X.new.foo
    X.new.foo { puts "  No arg but block"}
    

    gives:

    default
    default
      No arg but block
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

This is beyond both making sense and my control. That being said here is
I would like to update my SQL lite database with the native update-method of
I know its probably possible, but is it practical and doable to try and
I know its probably possible, but is it practical and doable to try and
I have several USB mass storage flash drives connected to a Ubuntu Linux computer
After having read Ian Boyd 's constructor series questions ( 1 , 2 ,
I'm doing some changes on my routes, and suddenly the following is appearing in
I have a snippet to create a 'Like' button for our news site: <iframe
I would like to remove/delete a migration file. How would I go about doing
There doesn't seem to be any tried and true set of best practices to

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.