[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ruby-talk
Subject:    Re: Is this old style Ruby?
From:       Florian Gross <flgr () ccan ! de>
Date:       2005-02-16 20:49:50
Message-ID: 37hpn4F5eurlsU1 () individual ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

why the lucky stiff wrote:

> Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> 
>> I allow '::' for method calls to denote class methods (with C++ style
>> appearance).  David doesn't like it.  I think _why liked it.
> 
> I like it okay.  Not with fervor.
> 
> @var is instance var.  obj.meth is instance method.
> @@var is class var.  obj::meth is class method.
> 
> I guess I thought that the notion of single-character for any instance 
> syntax and double-character for any class syntax might be simpler.

With such cases (I apply the same rule to constant naming, I don't see 
why I should use SHOUTING_CAPS for non-class constants) I always wonder 
about others doing an arbitrary distinction between classes and objects 
-- are classes after all not also objects?

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]