On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / ruby-lang.org> wrote: > In message "Re: [ruby-core:27407] Re: [Feature #1082] add Object#singleton_class ¨Âåôèïä¢ > ¨ÂÔõå¬ Êá²°±° ±±º²¶º´± «°¹°°¬ ÓèõçÍáåä¼óèõçïÀòõâùìáîç®ïòç÷òéôåó> |I prefer singleton_class than eigenclass. ¨Â óõððïóôèáô ¢óéîçìåôïî > |class" is not so confusing with a class which implements the Singleton > |pattern because the word singleton remind Ruby users of singleton > |methods rather than the Singleton pattern. > Basically, I agree. ¨Âõô ãáîîïô äåîù ôèæáãô ôèáô ÷å áìòåáäèáöå > singleton.rb in the distribution, which provide Singleton class. ¨Â > confess I did. ¨Âòïâáâìóèïõìäî§èáöå I just did a quick check of 1.8's singleton.rb, and Singleton is a module, not a class (which I'm sure you really knew, but it's important to my point). I think that it's easy enough to say that every object can have a singleton_class, which sits between the object and any of its ancestors; not every object, however, implements the Singleton Pattern through the Singleton module. That said, taking my interpretation above (that the {singleton,eigen}class sits between the object and its ancestors, if it's correct) a quick thesaurus check suggests either: * betwixt_class * inter_class (as in "international", "existing or occurring between classes") betwixt is more fun, but the idea of calling it an interclass makes a lot of sense to me. -austin -- Austin Ziegler halostatue / gmail.com austin / halostatue.ca http://www.halostatue.ca/ http://twitter.com/halostatue