Nice. But almost unreadable. I'd refactor into a few functions.

I don't understand... why don't you have to have some kind of conditional that spits out "super" at any point?

Another problem with not returning this arises, when you try to check whether your created object is an instance of NameMe or not.

var person = new NameMe('John', 'Doe');
person instanceof NameMe; // false, if you return a new object, which this solution does.

:)

Since there are no prototype changes, it does not matter. Wouldn't best practice be to use "this" for any constructor function?

This is obviously an intro repo meant to teach about the constructor functions. A workaround that defeats the purpose of the constructor does not seem it should be a preferred solution.

Regex usually isn't the best for readability but it's a lot cleaner than how I removed the _ and =. I'm new to ruby so bare with me when I ask, are ternary operators prefered? I see them everywhere in the solutions but I've never liked the way read vs a regular if else.

Fixed it!

I'll shout them out as I go - but it's really looking much better already.

Line 5, 'Whe' should be 'We'.

I think that a hash would work well, but don't get me wrong - I don't think your solution is wrong (I really like it wrapped in a class), it's just that I don't like case statements - they look kinda ugly to me :D

Thanks. What do you suggest in place of the switch? Using a Hash?

Thanks.

I have fixed the title. Could you point me other typos? Sorry but my native language is not English.