On 20 Ϧ, 21:17, David Masover <ni... / slaphack.com> wrote:
> On Monday, June 20, 2011 11:10:35 AM Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
> > On 20 Ϧ, 16:54, Christopher Dicely <cmdic... / gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This second thing is actually the current convention for "!" for
> > > normal methods (e.g., not just "flat" Kernel functions.): "!"
> > > indicates a more-dangerous alternative when the base name is already
> > > used.
>
> > Which would mean the rule apply, and the question is:
>
> > Is "require_relative" more dangerous than "require", thus "require!"
> > would fit the naming-convention?
>
> > I say:
>
> > yes, because you can include everything from your source-tree, where
> > "require" loads only from predefined paths.
>
> False.
[...] - (not readed, 'cause it's anyway biased babbling)

.

--
http://lazaridis.com