Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes?

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

>>I would like to see the two roles (namespaces, mix-ins) separated.
> I too have the feeling that a Module has too many aspects clustered
> together.
> 
> Btw, do you think it's right that foo.extend(bar) is any different from
> class<<foo;extend bar end ?... and don't you have the feeling that extend
> should be called something else, as well as that something else should be
> called extend ? Either that or the same about include... I don't feel like
> the difference (and similarities) between behaviour of "extend" and
> "include" is reflected in their naming...

Hm, did you mean extend() vs. class << obj; include(); end? I think (or 
expect) those behave the same, but I might be wrong.

Regarding the naming not making the semantic difference obvious: I think 
that's true, though it would be hard to come up with short names that do 
it better. I think I'm already used to it anyway...