bryan.a.soto at gmail.com
Wed Apr 5 02:17:01 EDT 2006
I've updated the ticket with everything. I hope anyway. Thanks.
On 4/4/06, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/4/06, Bryan Soto <bryan.a.soto at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/4/06, Bryan Soto <bryan.a.soto at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/4/06, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 4/3/06, Bryan Soto <bryan.a.soto at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hmm... That's a thought. Why not just store the properties as
> > > > > annotations? The prop_* methods and property could just be interfaces
> > > > > to the annotation system. I wonder if that would work...
> > > >
> > > > It does actually. Except it also creates the attribute (Seems kind of
> > > > a waste not to since the information is there), and of course it does
> > > > that enchanting thing.
> > >
> > > It does? Hmm... I must be missing something...
> > >
> > I see. It uses both annotations *and* properties for storage. I meant
> > just using annotations.
> I agree. That would be nice.
> > Final outcome: Matz^H^H^H^HGeorge is open to renaming, but doesn't
> > like any of the suggestions so far. Ever get that weird deja vu
> > feeling?
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they
will surprise you with their ingenuity." —General George S. Patton
More information about the Nitro-general