From: hemant <gethemant@...>
Date: 2008-02-29T02:04:16+09:00
Subject: Re: Proposed Solutions - Was [ Re: Monkeypatching is Destroying Ruby ]

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Sam Smoot <ssmoot@gmail.com> wrote:
>  I'm with James on this, the wins from Ruby's flexibility far out-weigh
>  the downsides.

I am with James on this as well. Open Classes is a feature and as I
said I love it.


>  On the other hand, I don't think I've seen a suggestion quite like
>  this before. It's pretty neat actually I think. Like a poor-man's
>  selector-namespaces.
>
>  Now if we ever did get selector-namespaces, then I'd be completely
>  against this. But since it appears we're _not_ getting the feature,
>  this isn't a half-bad substitute IMO.

I am with you here. If we can get selector-namespaces, we wouldn't
need this. Although in case of overriding method
defined in parent class, 'def!' could still be useful.

>
>  Except for the "ruby throwing up" part. Collissions should be
>  warnings, not fatal errors. Otherwise, like you said, you eventually
>  may not have the source for a lib, so you wouldn't have a choice but
>  to abandon it or hack in something like:
>
>  require 'faster_csv'
>  Array.send(:undefine_method, :to_csv)
>
>  I'm not saying this def! idea is really needed... but I do thing it's
>  pretty novel an idea, and I don't see any downsides.
>
>



-- 
Let them talk of their oriental summer climes of everlasting
conservatories; give me the privilege of making my own summer with my
own coals.

http://gnufied.org