From: Phrogz <gavin@...>
Date: 2007-02-28T15:15:05+09:00
Subject: Re: Class method declarations help

On Feb 27, 5:22 pm, MenTaLguY <men...@rydia.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:20:11 +0900, "jmb-d" <jon.budardan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > OK, Chris -- I'll bite:  why the preference for 1 or 2 class methods
> > using "def self.my_method_name" over having many using the "class <<
> > self..."?
>
> This has come to be my own preference as well, due to the POLT (Principle of Least Typing) :)

Although I see your smiley, let's analyze this.

   irb(main):001:0> "class << self".length
   => 13
   irb(main):002:0> "end".length
   => 3
   irb(main):003:0> "self.".length
   => 5
   irb(main):004:0> 16 / 5
   => 3

You'd need to type four or more 'class' methods before you made up for
the overhead of typing that the singleton class technique requires.
Though I suppose you could go crazy terse and use "class<<self",
saving two spaces and bringing the breakeven point down to three or
more class methods.

But as I pointed out in my other reply, having many methods in the
singleton is exactly the time when (IMO) you *don't* want to get
orphaned from the singleton opening. It's too easy to mistake a class
method for an instance (and vice-versa).

The good news, though, is that RDoc correctly documents both styles as
class methods.