From: daz <dooby@...10.karoo.co.uk>
Date: 2010-01-05T17:47:47+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:27415] Re: [Feature #1082] add Object#singleton_class 	method

Austin Ziegler wrote:
> <snip>
>
> That said, taking my interpretation above (that the
> {singleton,eigen}class sits between the object and its ancestors, if
> it's correct) a quick thesaurus check suggests either:
>
>   * betwixt_class
>   * inter_class (as in "international", "existing or occurring between classes")
>
> betwixt is more fun, but the idea of calling it an interclass makes a
> lot of sense to me.
>
> -austin
>   

At one time, I was thinking that *interclass* (or intraclass) might be
suitably descriptive but didn't suggest it because adding another choice
didn't appear to have a chance of leading to a solution.
The main candidates were 'singleton_class' (which didn't seem to be
approvable) or 'some alternative to singleton_class which was spelled
differently but meant the same thing to rubyists'. ;)

Now, any alternative to 'singleton_class' has to challenge the
'eigenclass' group who have fought tirelessly to give a name to
"class << obj; self; end".

Even though I'm not an advocate of 'eigenclass', I'd have to argue that
its searchability is far better than 'interclass' - which is horrible :/

+1 for 'singleton_class' approval.

Maybe a documentation comment can be added to say that 'eigenclass'
was a strong proposal for the method name. At least, if questions are
asked on ruby-talk, responders can offer a useful search term which
yields some very useful information connecting most of the issues
which have been discussed. :)


daz