From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2007-03-23T23:22:17+09:00
Subject: Re: About class methods visibility (public/private)

Hi,

In message "Re: About class methods visibility (public/private)"
    on Fri, 23 Mar 2007 22:45:14 +0900, Ruby Admirer <ruby_admirer@yahoo.com> writes:

|  I totally agree. If the current two utility methods are to stay in the Ruby core, please :
|  - add the missing one for protected visibility

If you understand the current behavior of protected visibility, you
will understand why protected_class_method is not useful at all.
That's why we don't have it.

|  - change the naming of these methods for removing the confusion
|  for the overall consistency.

If we can drop them, why bother to rename?  Consistency does not come
first in the Ruby's design.

							matz.