From: "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Date: 2003-12-17T23:55:02+09:00
Subject: Re: UnboundMethods Useless?

On Wednesday 17 December 2003 03:32 pm, ts wrote:
> >>>>> "P" == Peter  <Peter.Vanbroekhoven@cs.kuleuven.ac.be> writes:
>
> P> By the same reasoning, Ruby is suggesting that any module makes sense in
>
>  a module is not a class

He's talking about the methods in the module that you include in the class. 
You know, like Enumerable's. What difference does it make if it's one lone 
method or a whole bunch stuck in a namespace?

And BTW, last night I figured out how to do what I wanted by this very means. 
I stuck one method in a module and moved the module around. But it turns out 
the Ruby is again limited in this regard, b/c including modules in a class 
actually has no effect on previously created objects of that class. To quote 
matz:

  "This is part of weakness of Ruby's module system.
   Including module into another module does not affect already
   created instance/class/module."

-- 
T.