Feature #8164: Public/Private

• Status: Assigned
• Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version: -

• #privatehttp://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Module.html#method-i-private
  • #private_class_methodhttp://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Module.html#method-i-private_class_method
  • #publichttp://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Module.html#method-i-public
  • #public_class_methodhttp://www.ruby-doc.org/core-1.9.3/Module.html#method-i-public_class_method

Would it be a good idea to compress these 4 methods to 2 methods?

public - Can set both instance and class methods to public by passing
them in as symbol
private - Can set both instance and class methods to private by passing
them in as symbol

and enable them to be called at top of class? Is this a good idea? It would
clean up Module# and encourage use of these two
as methods rather than keywords

[drbrain (Eric Hodel)]

• Category set to core

=begin

If private_class_method is removed, how will the class method foo be set to private here:

class C
def self.foo() end
def foo() end

private :foo

end

=end

[EdwardCh (Edward Chen)]

"Stuff" the private() method to take the explicit options.
A possible solution would be:
private (:instance => [], :class => [:foo])

In this way, although it adds a bit of complexity to the private and public methods, we would have reduced the method count of Module by 2 and simplified a class view => I can see all the public, private methods at a glance.

[drbrain (Eric Hodel)]

• Status changed from Open to Assigned
• Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version set to 3.0

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

Class methods and instance methods are different things.
I don't see advantages of this proposal.

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Target version deleted (3.0)