http://memerocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/ Bill Burcham's Launch Platform Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:21:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ http://memerocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-3940 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:20:40 +0000 http://www.meme-rocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-3940 [...] Quacks Right In Ruby Module#include at Odds with Duck Typing I lamented the fact that Ruby wouldn’t treat an object as an Enumerable unless that object [...]

]]> http://memerocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-14 Sun, 03 Feb 2008 19:11:43 +0000 http://www.meme-rocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-14 Couldn’t you define Class.method_added to check for the methods and do the mixin?

]]> http://memerocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-13 Sat, 14 Jul 2007 00:17:51 +0000 http://www.meme-rocket.com/2006/09/28/ruby-moduleinclude-at-odds-with-duck-typing/#comment-13 That’s very clever! I’m inclined to say, however, that this sort of automagic mixin behavior could violate another design principle: exposing the interface you mean. I guess it as the role of the class itself to expose Enumerable, Comparable, and so forth, rather than having that behavior inferred when I might not expect it.

]]>