From: David Naseby <naseby@...>
Date: 2005-05-05T06:43:35+09:00
Subject: Re: traits (the other ones) vs. mixins

On 5/5/05, Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Ara.T.Howard wrote:
> ...
> >   - Traits can be composed: trait composition is symmetric and conflicting
> >   methods are excluded from the composition
> ...
> > i cannot see how this differs from mixins?  for example:
> 
> The operation of mixing in modules is not commutative.
> 
> class C1
>    include M1
>    include M2
> end
> 
> class C2
>    include M2
>    include M1
> end
> 
> C1 and C2 may have radically different behavior. I guess using ruby
> modules as traits in this sense would require either some checking in
> #module_included, or some global registry of which modules are allowed
> to define which methods.
> 
> 

They do; as I have (partially) written up on 
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~naseby/33.html

Traits are mixins, just exceedingly polite ones.

-- 
David Naseby
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~naseby/