From: Christoph Rippel <crippel@...>
Date: 2001-01-24T17:19:53+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:9793] Re: A generic prototype

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenichi Komiya [mailto:kom@mail1.accsnet.ne.jp]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 09:46 AM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: [ruby-talk:9774] Re: A generic prototype
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> From: "Christoph Rippel" <crippel@primenet.com>
> Subject: [ruby-talk:9764] A generic prototype
> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:09:07 +0900
> 
> > This in response to [ruby-talk:9761]
> > 
> > Thank you very much this is exactly what I wanted - except you
> > you got the math wrong - i.e the return type of + is wrong ;-)
> > (given my wrong input of course ..).
> > 
> > Thanks to your hint I cooked up a generics interface. As usual
> > I have eat my words - i.e. the thing is entirely based on mixin
> >  - at least it maintains a bit of the template flavor ... (the
> > type qualifier are necessary and there is no lose of speed to
> > access class constants like this if I remember correctly).
> 
> Just F.Y.I.
> 
> Parametric mix-in, which seems does generally same thing as your
> prototype, has been posted to ruby-list by gotoken.
> ([ruby-list:18476])
>    
> While digging it up fron blade, I found some interesting threads.
> Both of them are almos two years ago...  (I hope the auto translator
> does good job to them ...)
> 
>   * short conversation about parameterized class([ruby-dev:5462]).
> 
>   * rather long thread discussing 'generic' among other things
>     ([ruby-dev:4745])
> 
> Regards,
> Komiya.
Thanks for the interesting reads (well sort of a reading)! I think that
gotokens and my proto type are indeed similar. I guess his implementation 
is inheritance based from a top root class not mixin?  One could probably 
avoid most if not all warnings of my implementation by replacing the 
access to the `` instantiated class constants'' with a ``attribute_reader'' 
(not that I really like this idea). I believe that it should be possible to
come up with a generally useful ``module Templates''. Right now my thinking 
goes to write something like (note the Template(s)<= )

module Templates
class Template < Module
          # public instance methods
          # all but template_variables return arrays of strings
          template_constants #  template constants maybe ordered?
          template_methods   #  template controlled methods
          template_variables #  template controlled variables  
                             #  a replacement for Class variables 
          initialize  *anArrayOfConstantsNames 
          param_include  * theConstants 
          # replacement for  ``include''. To be called as
          # class Example
          # TemplateInstance.param_include  *theConstants  
          # end
          # maybe nice interface to manage template_variables  
end       #   
class  BetterMangagedTemplate < Module          
          # replacement for generic_bucket add_methods
          # to manage instantiated Classes (Modules?)
end
end
Comments welcome since I probably have zero talent writing
nice interfaces ...

Christoph