David Chelimsky wrote: > > > I don't think we should call it metaclass though, but I'm not sure > what I *do* want to call it. Metaclass != eigenclass, which is what > this really is, so maybe eigenclass.rb - don't let that hang you up > though, I can always change the names after. >
The thing is, Rails already defines #metaclass. So, I thought to check for that method before extending Object with my own. If Object.respond_to? :metaclass == true then we are in Rails, or some other framework that provides the same thing, and so we need not provide our own. Otherwise we add it. Comments? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
