Modules and methods

[Brian Schröder]

I mean that you can't use that method anywere at anytime, only within

the module or class.
This is the c++ way

You have included the module, so you are inside of the module and may use it.

Regards,

Brian

 

[Javier Valencia]

J> This is the c++ way

this is what I wanted to hear : perhaps now it's time to you to learn the
ruby way ))


Guy Decoux

hehehe you caught me :'(
but i find it more "logical" in the c++ way

I'll have to manage the ruby way in the end!

 

[Javier Valencia]

You have included the module, so you are inside of the module and may use it.

Regards,

Brian

yeah, i understand now, but without including it, works too. I have to
use the class << "thing"

 

[Robert Klemme]

hehehe you caught me :'(
but i find it more "logical" in the c++ way

We can certainly debate that. I for my part have found it always
irritating that in C++ and Java you can access private members of another
instance of the same class. This is convenient in some cases and
arguments can be put forward to support this. However, you can argue with
some justification that it breaks encapsulation which is one of the big
nono's of OO. My 0.02 EUR...

I'll have to manage the ruby way in the end!

Kind regards

robert

 

[Yukihiro Matsumoto]

Hi,

In message "Re: Modules and methods"

|There should be an api change to allow a more "user friendly" way to do
|things?

We need to define "user friendly" before entering serious discussion.
But I recommend you to learn the language first. In general, trying
to change your learning language is not a good idea.

matz.