On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:37, Xavier Noria <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The guide could warn about AR::Base. We could also redefine > AR::Base.subclasses to match the rest (I'd volunteer). ack says there > are not a lot of occurrences, but it wouldn't be backwards compatible. I can imagine that plugins might use Base.subclasses to iterate over AR models. thinking-sphinx does this, for instance. The question is, why would we standardize on strings? Why not actual references, like `ancestors`?--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
