From: Chad Perrin <code@...>
Date: 2011-06-18T03:27:43+09:00
Subject: Re: RFC - One word alias for require_relative

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:24:48AM +0900, Gary Wright wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 2:21 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:17:50AM +0900, Gary Wright wrote:
> >>=20
> >> I can't believe I'm adding to this conversation...=20
> >>=20
> >> Ruby already has an idiom for naming two related methods so how about:
> >>=20
> >> require "a/b"        # the usual
> >> require! "a/b"       # require relative to __FILE__=20
> >=20
> > I had no idea about "require!".  Thanks for mentioning it.
>=20
> It doesn't exist, I was just suggesting it as a possibility...

Damn.  Okay, never mind.

Of course, I'll just be happy with require_relative, anyway.  It seems
quite descriptive of its functionality, and succinct enough for my
purposes.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk37mQkACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKWk3gCeM/zpQOuQMEiroJt/rogJKQwi
kiUAniMn95MlcPIbX1AKu2q8H8/0og8x
=HBxz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj--