From: "Mauricio Fernández" <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2003-08-06T00:01:44+09:00
Subject: Re: Log4r and Ruby 1.8.0 in Singleton problems

On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:50:07PM +0900, Ben Giddings wrote:
> I see the argument, but I don't really like it.  One thing I like about 
> Java (which seems more OO than Ruby) is that when you import something, 
> what you're specifying is classes rather than files.  I like this idea 

Only because Java enforces a given directory structure. If you had the
same constraint in Ruby, require would be similar to import.

> Is it too late to come up with an alternative to 'require'?

Nothing prevents you from writing it, making it compatible with require
and getting some people to use it :-)

-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

How do you power off this machine?
	-- Linus, when upgrading linux.cs.helsinki.fi, and after using the machine for several months