From: Ryan Leavengood <leavengood@...>
Date: 2005-10-18T06:56:52+09:00
Subject: Re: declaratively caching results of a method

On 10/17/05, Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
>
> I'm debating between this suggestion and Pit's (where you access the cache via
> it's name and as an instance method).  I dunno - what do people prefer?
>
> This one is certainly simpler :)

I prefer Pit's. Otherwise you'll have to hang on to each cache
yourself (should you memoize several methods), instead of just letting
the class do it.

Ryan