From: Paul Battley <pbattley@...>
Date: 2006-07-13T18:12:02+09:00
Subject: Re: prototype-0.1.0

On 13/07/06, transfire@gmail.com <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
> The only thing I see, is that your use of the term 'prototype' betrays
> a Class-based OOP background. Ie. You're usimg "prototype" as one would
> "class" and "instantiate" them albiet via a deep clone. Using a neutral
> term like 'object' does away with that.
>
>   a = object{ a 1; b 2; c 3 }

How about this:

---

require 'prototype'

def Prototype(&blk)
  return Prototype.new(&blk)
end

singleton = Prototype do
  @a, @b = 40, 2

  def answer() @a + @b end
end

p singleton.answer

---

Paul.