Hi --

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Devin Mullins wrote:

>  dblack@[...].net wrote:
> > I do sometimes wonder what would happen if the ancestry array were
> > writeable.  It could be interesting.  I haven't thought through the
> > possible pitfalls.
> 
>  You mean, like Object#become? :)

Not exactly.  As I understand it, #become involves references changing
from one object to another.  I'm thinking of something more like:

   module M
   end

   a = Object.new
   class << a
     ancestors.unshift(M)  # essentially same as a.extend(M)
   end

>  Seriously, how would that play with the core classes, which don't keep their 
>  state in instance variables?

I'm not sure how that would matter specifically.  What problem are you
envisioning?  (Not that the whole thing wouldn't be a train-wreck
anyway :-)


David

-- 
* Books:
   RAILS ROUTING (new! http://safari.awprofessional.com/9780321509246)
   RUBY FOR RAILS (http://www.manning.com/black)
* Ruby/Rails training
     & consulting:  Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)