From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2009-02-01T06:58:03+09:00
Subject: Re: Object#singleton_class in Ruby 1.9?

On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 9:13 PM, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I'd like to have a singleton_class method, but even if there isn't
> one, I would definitely not like a meta-ruby standard extension. It
> suggests much too clear a separation between programming and
> metaprogramming in Ruby, whereas part of the coolness of the language
> is how interoperative it all is (e.g., the very fact that singleton
> methods are stored in classes, which in turn fit into the whole
> class/object model in a predictable way).
Well please let me rephrase this:

I think #singleton_class is a great name. I want it, but rather than
in core in a standard library, or even a core class.
However that consideration was OT - 4 which I apologize - and it might
indeed be worth a discussion for 2.0 if 'nuff people think like that.

Back OnT, I really think it is too late to change #singleton_class it
has become so much used in Ruby's jargon.
I am well aware of the ambiguity with the Singleton pattern, but I
feel it is enough related to still be the ideal choice.

R.




-- 
It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the
dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any
longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but
the world as it will be ... ~ Isaac Asimov