[Nitro] Serious discussion on Annotaitons - Part II

transfire at gmail.com transfire at gmail.com
Mon Nov 13 22:21:56 EST 2006

transfire at gmail.com wrote:
> There is one other possiblity however, while it still would incur some
> penalty I expect it would be fairly lower. Instead of storing
> annotations in a hash, we could store them in class methods. Eg.
>   Bar.ann :foo, :class => Integer
> could translate into
>   def Bar.ann_foo
>     super + @ann_foo
>   end
>   @ann_foo += {:class => Integer}
> where #+ is an alias for Hash#merge.
> This essentially utilizes Ruby's internal inheritance features to do
> the the same thing my implementation does manually. So although it's
> doing the same thing, it should be fairly faster. It also means the
> basic notation for annotation lookup is:

I further consideratioj of this idea, It seesm to a have one fatal
flaw. Modules qua class aren;t inherited. So super won't catch those.
So the implemention I last posted stands.


More information about the Nitro-general mailing list