From: Corey <corey_s@...>
Date: 2004-11-12T05:04:59+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby idiom for attribute definition?

On Thursday 11 November 2004 12:46 pm, Dave Thomas wrote:

> On Nov 11, 2004, at 13:29, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I think the Struct is better OO design.  I'm
> > firmly in the "Ask for help, not information." camp of OO programmers,
> > so I try to avoid "getters/setters" whenever possible.
> >

And from the perspective a new ruby user, I'm in the "ask for help _and_
information" camp - so these explanations are really beneficial, thanks!


> > A Struct on the other hand is just a record holder to my mind, so I
> > have much less problem with using it in a case like this.
>
> Exactly - that's what made me suggest it. A class with a large number
> of attr_accessors is not really an encapsulated class, so it felt to me
> that a Struct would be more appropriate.
>
> I almost suggested using a Hash... :)
>

Heh - I actualy started off with a Hash, but I thought that was just my
old perl habits trying break through...   <grin>

I'm in the midst of writing another question, which looks to be related
to all this - ( perhaps I should be using a struct or hash after all ) - 
hopefully you guys can point me in the right direction.



-- 

"To a mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders."
  - Chuang Tzu