From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-09-01T04:47:10+09:00
Subject: Re: python-style decorators

On 8/31/07, Trans <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 31, 7:37 am, "Robert Dober" <robert.do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/31/07, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > So you've hit the same wall I did with module inheritance. That's
> > > unfortunate.
> >
> > Hopefully I am not too egocentric about my own approach, but if so you
> > could maybe explain ;)?
> > I fail to grasp where exactly you hit that wall, I have this
> > impression that it is the fact that you bind your methods too early,
> > if you would just refrain from using methods that are defined inside
> > the class, but would always do some include/extend trick, would the
> > wall not just come trembling down?
> > Sorry if I am missing the obvious here.
>
> In my case, I wanted to use the notation in stay of ClassMethods
> tricks. For example:
>
>   module M
>
>     def ext.foo
>        "foo"
>     end
>
>   end
>
>   class X
>     include M
>   end
>
>   X.foo #=> foo
>
> This proves impossible to do in a modular fashion because you can't
> extend a class with a singleton class.
>
> But you may well be right about the current case, hence the potential
> solution I posted.
>
Still trying to get the problem
I know that you know (do I?) that you can do
module M
  def foo; "foo" end
end
class X
   extend M
end

where's the catch?
R.

-- 
I'm an atheist and that's it. I believe there's nothing we can know
except that we should be kind to each other and do what we can for
other people.
-- Katharine Hepburn