Fix Ruby 1.9.2 support.

ampex.gemspec

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 Gem::Specification.new do |s|
   s.name = "ampex"
-  s.version = "1.1.2"
+  s.version = "1.2.0"
   s.platform = Gem::Platform::RUBY
   s.author = "Conrad Irwin"
   s.email = "conrad.irwin@gmail.com"

lib/ampex.rb

@@ -1,18 +1,30 @@
-require 'blankslate'
-
 # Copyright 2010 Conrad Irwin <conrad.irwin@gmail.com> MIT License
 #
 # For detailed usage notes, please see README.markdown
-#
-class Metavariable < BlankSlate
+
+# NOTE: Ruby 1.9 seems to provide a default blank slate that isn't
+# very blank, luckily it also provides a BasicObject which is pretty
+# basic.
+if defined? BasicObject
+  superclass = BasicObject
+else
+  require 'rubygems'
+  require 'blankslate'
+  superclass = BlankSlate
+end
+
+class Metavariable < superclass
+  # Take a local copy of these as constant lookup is destroyed by BasicObject.
+  Metavariable = self
+  Thread = ::Thread
 
   # When you pass an argument with & in ruby, you're actually calling #to_proc
   # on the object. So it's Symbol#to_proc that makes the &:to_s trick work,
   # and Metavariable#to_proc that makes &X work.
   attr_reader :to_proc
 
   def initialize(&block)
-    @to_proc = block || lambda{|x| x}
+    @to_proc = block || ::Proc.new{|x| x}
   end
 
   # Each time a method is called on a Metavariable, we want to create a new
@@ -32,6 +44,12 @@ def method_missing(name, *args, &block)
     mv
   end
 
+  # BlankSlate and BasicObject have different sets of methods that you don't want.
+  # let's remove them all.
+  instance_methods.each do |method|
+    undef_method method unless %w(method_missing to_proc __send__ __id__).include? method.to_s
+  end
+
   private
 
   # In order to support assignment via &X (expressions of the form &X['one'] = 2),

spec/ampex_spec.rb

@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ def intercept(b)
   it "should preserve existing #to_proc in an object's singleton class" do
     a = Object.new
     class << a
-      def to_proc; lambda { 3 }; end
+      def to_proc; lambda { |x| 3 }; end
     end
 
     [1].map(&a).should == [3]