Matthew Moss
7/10/2008 7:52:00 PM
I wanted to add one more note...
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 klass.class_eval do
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 @rules, @records =3D [], []
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 end
Considering that this bit of code injects @rules and @records into
klass, my preference is that they be named something _less_
straightforward. My own, similar solution used @reportable_rules and
@reportable_records.
The reason? There is nothing preventing a client from further
extending their own subclasses of Reportable. Actually, I will lightly
encourage that in part 3. To avoid potential name conflicts with
client-side extensions, I'd go with names more complex than the simple
@rules and @records.