> I could see this being useful, but I can also see the problem of name > clashes (which are a nightmare to debug). I would bet there's a good > reason lifecycles were separated to their own class and guess that it > was to avoid some sort of namespace issue.
Exactly right. Especially because you often have no idea that the name you chose clashed with some internal name. The "nightmare to debug" part is the real problem -- you can easily end up with a problem that has no recognisable relationship to your lifecycle and waste hours tracing it. ActiveRecord models have many hundreds of methods on them - it's getting very crowded in there! You could always write delegate :active_state?, :inactive_state?, :to => :lifecycle For the methods you want Tom -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hobo Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hobousers?hl=en.
