[#1263] Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

33 messages 2000/02/08

[#1376] Re: Scripting versus programming — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

Conrad writes:

13 messages 2000/02/15

[#1508] Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...>

17 messages 2000/02/19
[#1544] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/02/23

Hello Ian,

[#1550] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...> 2000/02/23

On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 02:56:10AM -0500, Yasushi Shoji wrote:

[#1516] Ruby: PLEASE use comp.lang.misc for all Ruby programming/technical questions/discussions!!!! — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

((FYI: This was sent to the Ruby mail list.))

10 messages 2000/02/19

[#1569] Re: Ruby: constructors, new and initialise — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article

12 messages 2000/02/25

[ruby-talk:01239] Re: Singleton classes

From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2000-02-05 15:55:21 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1239
Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:01238] Re: Singleton classes"

|It's like we're subclassing the class of an object. How about
|'anonymous subclass'?

Hmm, I don't know which is better.  As non native English speaker, I
have no idea about the nuance of the word `singleton'.

Anyway, things done by `class <<obj' are like:

  * make virtual anonymous subclass of the object
  * define everything into the virtual anonymous class just like
    normal class definition.
  * make the virtual anonymous class as the class of object.
  * or, from other point of view, copy the newly defined attributes of
    the anonymous class as the singleton attributes of the object.

In the source, I called this `virtual anonymous class' as singleton
class.  That's why we had named it so.

|Wouldn't the object be a Proc object?

Yes, and is closure.  They are same thing in Ruby.

							matz.

In This Thread