From: Martin DeMello <martindemello@...>
Date: 2005-12-08T05:12:34+09:00
Subject: Re: injecting dynamic methods into a class

dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Martin DeMello wrote:
> 
> Not quite:
> 
>    ruby -ve 'class << 3; end'
>    ruby 1.9.0 (2005-05-20) [i686-linux]
>    -e:1: no singleton class for Fixnum (TypeError)

A very palpable hit :)

> 
> :-)  Also, with Matz discussing it so much, I'd put it in the category
> of having official-name status.
> 
> But I know what you mean about jargon.  Just as people call objects
> "underlying thingies" and so forth, there's no particular reason for
> people not to use a term like "own class" or "eigenclass" (or "class a
> soi", if they want to translate it into yet another language :-)
> descriptively.  It's just that the burgeoning usage and positioning of
> some of these terms have been unfortunate, in relation to the process
> already underway.

But IMO this is the only real way to make sure that, when we do
standardise on a term, it's a good one.

martin