On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Stephen Paul Weber <
[email protected]> wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 13:54:52 UTC-5, Xavier Noria wrote:
>>
>>
>> Any of the options are terrible in my view, expectations are broken all
>> over the place.
>>
>>
> If we throw out the magical version (which seems a popular opinion, and is
> certainly quite fine with me), does letting the autoloader find
> AppModule::User in app/models/user.rb really break that many expectations?
> That and having ActiveRecord strip the AppModule prefix off classes for the
> purposes of table naming (probably) I think would be exactly the same as
> the "auto namespace" version of the proposal, only without anything being
> automatic.
>
That is not Ruby.
As a Ruby programmer, if I see
class User < AR::Base
end
That User has to belong to Object.
If an application wants AppModule::User then it can define it that way and
have autoloading working and everything. Just use Ruby.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
