Am Dienstag, 7. Dezember 2010, 18:13:09 schrieb Jeff Johnson:
> Perhaps I don't understand. What is the issue naming "rpm.so"?
Ah, I wanted to be done with a simple "require 'rpm'" without too much behind-
the-scenes-fiddeling with extra name mapping. Ruby modules and classes are
mutable, i.e.
class Foo
def a
end
end
# ... code passes ...
class Foo
def b
end
end
Leaves us with one class with two methods. This allows for some very elegant
Ruby ideoms.
It is AFAIK possible to do a "require 'libfoo_internal'" and having a call to
rb_define_module("Foo") in libfoo_internal.so. It's just not that pretty IMHO
and doesn't follow Ruby ideoms.
But, nevertheless, I'll try to stick with the RPM naming scheme. If I
encounter problems, I'll cry for help. :-)
Eric
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
