From: Piotr Szotkowski <chastell@...>
Date: 2011-06-17T01:58:05+09:00
Subject: Re: Kernel#autoload vs require_relative

--OaZoDhBhXzo6bW1J
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Intransition:

> On Jun 16, 7:29=C2=A0am, Piotr Szotkowski <chast...@chastell.net> wrote:

>> $LOAD_PATH << File.dirname(__FILE__)
>> module Foo
>>   autoload :Bar, 'foo/bar'
>>   autoload :Baz, 'foo/baz'
>>   autoload :Qux, 'foo/qux'
>> end

>> require_relative 'foo/bar'
>> require_relative 'foo/baz'
>> require_relative 'foo/qux'

> The question is, are these libs going to loaded
> anyway regardless of what is done with the library?

In my case it depends on the library in question; I was
looking for an approach that could use a relative-path
Kernel#autoload without touching $LOAD_PATH.

=E2=80=94 Piotr Szotkowski
--=20
At the dentist=E2=80=99s thinking about whether hints of method size can be
seen in intra-class dependency diagrams. Oh no, here comes the drill.
                                                   [Michael Feathers]




--OaZoDhBhXzo6bW1J
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk36NhIACgkQi/mCfdEo8UrJiQCfZ+zoKiq5rTa5qlhB3UJ+tpq0
vBYAoJtb1kPCF9tcylnTnnTrZ0LpBFrT
=MT3l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--OaZoDhBhXzo6bW1J--