From: Eric Schwartz <emschwar@...>
Date: 2002-11-09T03:33:40+09:00
Subject: Re: understanding modules/classes

Austin Ziegler <austin@halostatue.ca> writes:
> It does matter where you put it, to a degree. "include" simply
> includes the methods and classes from a module into the current
> object scope. The "standard" object scope is (more or less) the
> Object object.
> 
> Thus, when I do:
> 
>   include MIME::Types
> 
> Then I have made it so that I can call the MIME::Types functions
> without any specifiers (although it may not be a good idea to do
> so).

Okay, I'm still confused.  I get the feeling that I just walked right
past the point without even noticing it. You seem to be talking about
Modules as if they're just collections of functions.  I see them as a
way of implementing namespaces for Ruby objects, which I see as
necessary. 

Otherwise, as I understand it, if I defined a TestTableModel class,
and you do too, you will silently extend mine, instead of creating an
entirely new class (or better yet, warning you of the problem and
falling over and dying).  Whereas if I hide them inside a TestHarness
Module, you'd have to explicitly "include" it to get that problem, and
at least at that point you can be presumed to know what you're doing.

-=Eric
-- 
Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million
typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare.
		-- Blair Houghton