From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@...>
Date: 2012-04-21T09:12:37+09:00
Subject: Re: Why must I know whether I extend a class or a module?

On 20 April 2012 13:53, Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
> The forced distinction only serves to take that flexibility away from the
> programmer.

Is there not overhead associated with that distinction? I haven't
actually looked into it, but I'd assume that Modules are a lot more
light-weight than Classes, because of the things that can't be done
with them.

> There are other benefits too in that removing the distinction would allow
> auto instantiation, e.g.
>
>     class Foo::Bar
>     end
>
> Would work just fine, even though no `Foo` has been defined separately. This
> can be especially nice when requiring sub-files.

I can see that this would be convenient, but it also makes me cringe.
You're defining a namespace Foo without ever explicitly defining it.
Why? What's its purpose?  How and where is it documented?  I can't
make my gut instinct accept this as anything but a bad idea.

-- 
  Matthew Kerwin, B.Sc (CompSci) (Hons)
  http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
  ABN: 59-013-727-651

  "You'll never find a programming language that frees
  you from the burden of clarifying your ideas." - xkcd