gwtmp01 / mac.com wrote:
> 
> On Jun 14, 2006, at 10:30 AM, transfire / gmail.com wrote:
>> Okay, so I'm wondering, will the annonymous module this creates get a
>> name of some sort instead of the ususal "#<Module:0xb7ca7e1c>"
> 
> I was thinking that the block would just be evaluated in the context of
> the targeted singleton class as vs. the context of a new anonymous
> module which is *then* included into the targeted singleton class.

Then inheritance problems will arise --  I think we need to use modules.


Daniel