From: Alder Green <alder.green@...>
Date: 2006-06-10T04:43:46+09:00
Subject: Re: Why the lack of mixing-in support for Class methods?

On 6/9/06, Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Here's another shortcut, dunno how original it is. I don't like the
> #import (or #include!) suggestions because they take control away from
> the module. In most cases, the module will know best which (if any)
> class methods to contribute.

Assuming #import would have a callback-hook like #included
(#imported?), how would the locus of control shift from where it is
right now?

In a somewhat related note:

Perhaps #import should call #include. Or maybe they would be entirely
seperate: #import for module-level methods, #include for
instance-level methods. Of course, this means that in the most common
case you'd have the unDRYish idiom:

import  Fooable
include Fooable

But it's still much better than the mass of boilerplate code we need
to paste there right now. Another suggestion:

import Fooable, :include => false

To import only the module level methods. I.e. :include => true by default.

-- 
-Alder