From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2004-02-16T20:19:55+09:00
Subject: Re: OT: Traits


"Daniel Berger" <djberg96@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:6e613a32.0402140823.6e549b24@posting.google.com...
> matz@ruby-lang.org (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote in message
news:<1076736977.263683.27564.nullmailer@picachu.netlab.jp>...
> > Hi,
> >
> > In message "OT: Traits"
> >     on 04/02/14, Daniel Berger <djberg96@hotmail.com> writes:
> >
> > |Since I haven't seen a full discussion on the topic, I thought I
would
> > |see what Ruby programmers think of "traits" as an OO concept.  Cool
> > |idea?  Or a solution in need of a problem?
> >
> > "module" in Ruby and "trait" are very similar idea.
> >
> > matz.
>
> Yes, I thought so, too.  Their argument against mixins boiled down to
> "What if you have identical methods in two different modules that you
> wish to 'include'?".  But, so far that just hasn't happened in my
> personal experience.

The problem that I see is with using Modules is when traits have to be
exchanged during the life time of an instance.  At least I didn't manage
to include a Module and de-include if afterwards.  Or does simply
"overriding" by including another module with similar methods solve the
problem?

Kind regards

    robert