-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 16:15, I think Kevin Smith wrote:
> Holden Glova wrote:
> >> Let's say you wanted to add a debug logging
> >> method to several unrelated classes. The method
> >> is called log, and it figures out once where to
> >> send the log data, and after that it just sends
> >> it. Rather than inserting the same "def log..."
> >> code into each class, you can mix it in by
> >> creating a module that has the log method
> >> defined, and just including it into each class
> >> that you want to be able to log.
> >
> >Ok, this is an example where I would probably start out with aggregation.
> >Perhaps a pattern to look for would be when many classes are aggregating a
> >common class(s) to provide a(several) common elements of functionality -
> >would you/others agree with this? The light my have just clicked on within
> > my sometimes dark tunnel of vision *wink*
>
> Bingo. Typical aggregation would allow you to
> insert, say, a Logger object member into each of
> your classes. But what if you want to actually
> insert a handful of methods? Or a couple data
> members and some methods? Mixins allow you to do
> that and those inserted items are part of your
> class itself, rather than you having to remember
> that they're part of an aggregated member.
>
> Kevin

Thank you very much for every contributing to my question. This has been a 
few days of clarity on this subject matter, clarity owed to this gem of a 
list. Thanks again for all inputs received.

- -- 
Signed,
Holden Glova
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE6XBmrzrxa+Gy/b/4RAmK6AJ4hk/ZCL3qkhw8PZZPCyPnUz5cqywCfRhQM
K4LYYcjMPziTlmUs2ZOWUDM=
=is7F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----