From: "Victor \"Zverok\" Shepelev" <vshepelev@...>
Date: 2006-11-25T16:36:31+09:00
Subject: Re: Rubyish inst.var initializations

From: Robert Klemme [mailto:shortcutter@googlemail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 9:51 PM
>On 23.11.2006 02:36, Victor "Zverok" Shepelev wrote:
>> From: dblack@rubypal.com [mailto:dblack@rubypal.com] On Behalf Of
>> dblack@wobblini.net
>> Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 3:31 AM
>>> On Thu, 23 Nov 2006, Victor "Zverok" Shepelev wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all.
>>>>
>>>> I have some huge class with aspects of functionality spreaded in
>several
>>>> source files.
>>>>
>Frankly, I believe this is not a too good idea.  There should be one
>main place (i.e. file) responsible for this class's definition and all
>other places should only add to that class.  Changing initialize's
>signature would certainly be not a good idea either.
>
>If you feel, you have to initialize additional fields, then this is a
>cleaner solution - and also more modular:
>
>class Foo
>   def initialize(a,b,c)
>     super
>     @a=a
>     @b=b
>   end
>end
>
>module Mixin
>   def initialize(*a,&b)
>     super
>     @foo = []
>   end
>end
>
>Then you can safely do in another place:
>
>class Foo
>   include Mixin
>end


Robert, thanks. It's a REALLY good point.
I've completely haven't think about mixin's initialize. Would guess it.

V.