From: "Wayne E. Seguin" <wayneeseguin@...>
Date: 2007-09-11T00:38:58+09:00
Subject: Re: Singleton Modules rather than Singleton Classes

--Apple-Mail-3-678133907
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=US-ASCII;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed

On Sep 01, 2007, at 19:31 , Robert Dober wrote:
> <snip>
> All three proposals make sense to me, what does not make sense to me
> is the current state of affairs, as long as
> instance_eval{
>   def a; @a end
> }
> works on arbitrary objects I will stay confused ;).
> It probably all depends on what kind of OO Style one prefers,
> Personally I would be looking forward to some serious  
> simplifications, like e.g.
> * Any unbound method can be bound to any object.
> * Methods and Blocks could be unified.
> * Method definitions in classes behave as in Modules.
> * define_method defines a method on any object
> * define_instance_method defines an instance method on any object.
> * Any object can have instances. (well and classes just went away)
>
> Well just some ideas more ;)
>
> Robert

Bump!

I'd like to hear the view of Matz on these ideas?

   ~Wayne

s///g
Wayne E. Seguin
Sr. Systems Architect & Systems Administrator


--Apple-Mail-3-678133907--