On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:32:12AM -0400, Stevan Little wrote: > So, if we were to go more with the Ruby model of Module then actually > this is not that far off. Ruby modules are the entire basis of their > mixins system (which we all know is the poor mans roles). So adding > method-ish type stuff to Module has some precedent.
Ruby's Module is the cop-out reason I gave myself for continuing to call it 'method' when I moved it. I'm not sure Ruby is a good enough authority to appeal to, though, unlike CLOS or Smalltalk or something. hdp.
