From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-08-02T05:41:54+09:00
Subject: Re: RDoc now does constants

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Thomas" <dave@pragprog.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: RDoc now does constants


> Hal E. Fulton wrote:
> 
> 
> > Does this mean that Structs will now be
> > documented? There was some discussion 
> > of this on irc last night.
> 
> 
> You could do something like:
> 
>     # A Person is used to hold information on
>     # interested parties.
>     # name:  the person's name
>     # dob:   the date of birth (Date)
> 
>     Person = Struct.new(:name, :dob)
> 
> However, for now I'm not automatically extracting Struct information: 
> there are too many heuristics involved. I'm also concerned that I don't 
> promote Structs as first-class classes, simply because when developer's 
> user Structs they are often not considered to be at the same level as 
> other classes.
> 
> So... I thought that by adding constants I gave us all a chance to 
> experiment with Structs as well. If it turns out that I need to add 
> additional support for them too, then I'll do it.

Well, call me crazy, but I sometimes create a Struct
and later (usually as an afterthought) add methods
to it.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with this. Some, though,
will perhaps say I should refactor and make my Structs
into "real" classes.

Hal

--
Hal Fulton
hal9000@hypermetrics.com