From: Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>
Date: 2005-07-25T17:56:19+09:00
Subject: Re: Using a class namespace for subclasses

On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 05:05:55AM +0900, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> > Use a module to contain the classes:
> > 
> > module Hash
> >    class Ordered
> >    ...
> >    end
> >    class Sync
> >    ...
> >    end
> >    class Static
> >    ...
> >    end
> > end
> > 
> > myhash = Hash::Ordered.new
> 
> irb(main):001:0> module Hash; end
> TypeError: Hash is not a module
>         from (irb):1
> 
> but "class Hash" works.
> 
> I think the OP was asking whether this approach--using the Hash
> namespace--which seems more elegant, might have some drawbacks. It might
> set you up for some conflicts with constants other code defines in the
> Hash namespace.

True, but I think the only way to be 100% sure of avoiding that is to use a
vendor namespace.

  module VanderWerf
    module Hash
      class Ordered; end
    end
  end

or VanderWerf::Joel in case there are multiple VanderWerfs developing Ruby
code :-) Actually a domain name or E-mail address would be better.

Usually though, we just accept the risk. There's a risk that a future
version of Ruby (as well as another 3rd party library) might introduce its
own Hash::Ordered; equally, though, it might introduce OrderedHash.

Regards,

Brian.