Hi Nicholas
Is there a strict one-file-to-one-class convention now?
Reason I ask is, I have a problem with a file (entry.rb) that defines a base
class (Entry) and about 10 subclasses (ContactInfo and a bunch more).
It loads fine the first time, but when the file gets unloaded and then
reloaded, I get:
entry.rb:164: superclass mismatch for class ContactInfo
Line 164 is where ContactInfo is defined, which is the first class other
than Entry defined in this file. I''m guessing the error happens because
Entry is now a reference to a new class, while ContactInfo still points to
the old "Entry" is its parent.
Looking at the code, it does seem like it have a
one-file-one-class(-with-the-same-name-as-the-file) convention built-in.
//Lars
On 8/22/06, nseckar@gmail.com <nseckar@gmail.com>
wrote:>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> I''d like to get down to either i) fixing all the dependencies
issues
> with the new code or ii) giving up and reverting to the old. It would
> really help if those of you who have had troubles could file some
> tickets and assign them to me. If you like, add
''dependencies'' to
> keywords.
>
> Thanks,
> Nicholas
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---