Issue #14344 has been updated by kddeisz (Kevin Deisz).


I was proposing the former, which would be to have `refine` be a class method that would effectively be the same as `using` with an anonymous module. I get what you're saying about it being different between a class and a module but I'm not sure I necessary see that as a problem. Class and Module already don't have perfect parity (allocate, new, superclass) so it doesn't seem like we need to enforce that. I doubt people would be caught off guard by a change in the semantics of the method between Module and Class because it doesn't seem like it would be a common practice to be switching constants back and forth between modules and classes all the time.

----------------------------------------
Feature #14344: refine at class level
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14344#change-69532

* Author: kddeisz (Kevin Deisz)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
I rely on refinements a lot, but don't want to keep writing `Module.new` in code. I'm proposing `Object::refine`, which would create an anonymous module behind the scenes with equivalent functionality. So:

~~~ ruby
class Test
  using Module.new {
    refine String do
      def refined?
        true
      end
    end
  }
end
~~~

would become

~~~ ruby
class Test
  refine String do
    def refined?
      true
    end
  end
end
~~~

It's a small change, but reads a lot more clearly. Thoughts?



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>