News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The use of `class` for things that should be simple free functions. Parent comment

Re:The use of `class` for things that should be simple free ... by risorect on Thursday May 28, 2020 @04:47AM (#23334976)
In terms of ruby, we may be splitting hairs when it comes to namespaces vs classes. Modules, which are typically used for namespacing, can have state and extend themselves, making them effectively singleton classes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The use of `class` for things that should be simple free ... by ratww on Thursday May 28, 2020 @06:55AM (#23335851)
> Modules, which are typically used for namespacing, can have state

But there's nothing about state that makes it specific to classes. Namespaces in C++ can hold (static) state, for example. So it's actually the other way around: singleton classes can effectively be namespaces/modules.

[ Parent | on HN ]