[Nitro] Module name change
george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Sat Apr 21 03:31:31 EDT 2007
I still think that Inherited is right in this context. But we can do the
- rename the alias to SingleTableInheritance and provide two aliases,
SingleTableInherited and SingleTableParent.
counld you provide this patch?
On 4/20/07, Jonathan Buch <john at oxyliquit.de> wrote:
> > Did I miss the email where SchemaTableInheritence became
> > SingleTableInheritence?
> > I mean, I much prefer the new name, but given that we already dropped
> > schema_inheritence method, changing the module name is kinda breaky.
> well, if we break stuff, then we can also just 'pull through' and make the
> breakages as consistent as possible. :P
> Actually the real one is `SingleTableInherited` now. I talked with George
> about this on the channel, but I couldn't drive him away from that.
> I will try again now.
> class A
> is SingleTableInherited
> class B < A
> Lets look at the relation between parent and child first. `A` is not
> inherited, in the event of `B` not being around. This makes no sense in
> and of
> itself in the most cases, but it's nontheless true.
> `B` inherits from A, so it _inherited_ its capabilities. Does that mean
> `B` is 'single table inherited'?
> I may be picking on something 'fluid' here, but I think, that inheritance
> not a property of the parent, but only of the child. (Think .ancestors,
> is no way to find child classes from the parent.)
> I talked with Rayman shortly about this, and he came to the same
> His idea of a better name for that module: `STIParent`. I like that
> as it's a description of what 'pattern' is used here (STI) and in which
> it is in this pattern.
> So, George, please consider not using Inherited (even if it nicely
> to STI).
> Thank you for listening,
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Nitro-general