From: Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>
Date: 2006-11-29T18:41:32+09:00
Subject: Re: [ ruby-Bugs-6820 ] #ancestors never includes the singleton class (inconsistent)

> 2) You could think of all objects already having a singleton class
> (not from the implementation perspective). Yet, we don't want to force
> the implementation to create such a class when ancestors is called.
this is not a problem since my problem is with #ancestors being called *on* 
the singeton class. Therefore the singleton class *already exists*

> 3) It seems easy enough to create a specific accessor since all
> objects (except a few) are subject to this:
Unrelevant here for the same reason. It is not about accessing the 
singleton class, it is about having the singleton class behave *like* a 
real class. It already does so in a lot of ways. IMO it is sad that there 
is this kind of small differences when in every other way it behaves like 
a class ...

Regards,
Sylvain Joyeux