Hi,

In message "Re: Why the lack of mixing-in support for Class methods?"
    on Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:35:14 +0900, transfire / gmail.com writes:

|> you suggesting we replace module objects' singleton classes with such a
|> "module-level", or would the singleton methods and constants be defined
|> in both?
|
|You have to understand a little about how modules are tied into the
|inhertiance chain. Modules are linked via virtual classes. (There are
|some good diagrams of this in the Pickaxe, I believe it's under
|"Classes and Objects").  The idea is then to replace a module's current
|"metaclass" with a virtual class linking in a "metamodule". Anything in
|a module's "class << self" then is defined in this metamodule instead.

I don't think I understand you.  Do you want to allow #include to
include classes?  Without making it MI?  Hmm.

							matz.