From: Florian Gross <flgr@...>
Date: 2004-11-15T22:23:19+09:00
Subject: Re: Kernel#singleton_class

David A. Black wrote:

>>Maybe .meta_class and .meta_class_eval should really be part of Standard 
>>Ruby...
> 
> I've got an RCR in for singleton_class.  (I know, the terminology is
> different, but it's the same idea :-)  I still don't know what the
> perfect word would be for That Class.)  I don't think a separate
> _class_eval method would be necessary or good.  As with every other
> class, you could just call class_eval on the class object.  
> 
> I firmly believe that having a singleton_class method (or whatever
> it's called) would make it much, much easier for people to understand
> the whole design.  See <http://www.rcrchive.net/rcr/show/231>.

Hm, looks like I already voted on it. I can live with it being named 
#singleton_class, #meta_class or even #virtual_class -- I don't really 
know what name would be best. I'm just in favor of #meta_class because 
it avoids the name clash with the singleton pattern. (Which seems to be 
obsolete in Ruby anyway -- it seems to be the case that everywhere where 
you would use it you can just as well use a Module...)

I guess it's probably best to let matz decide the name.