Closed teliosdev closed 9 years ago
It looks like the build is failing for reasons independent to this change.
Yes, you have a point. Two nits:
AST::Processor::Module
. Maybe also deprecate AST::Processor
entirely, why not.Module
. That just describes how it's implemented, not what it does. Maybe Mixin
or Behavior
.I agree with both points; how should I deprecate AST::Processor
?
# @deprecated message...
Done.
Process
is a really awful name. It's a verb, and a module is a thing.
I have to say, I'm extremely happy with the amount of documentation that you provide in your library.
Renamed to Mixin
instead and merged. Thanks!
What version can I expect to find this in?
Released 2.1.0.
Awesome, thanks!
I don't know if this is an acceptable pull request because of the lack of a contributing file, but I wanted to modify the way the processor worked a little bit. My primary concern with the processor was that it was a class - you were forced to subclass the processor, which, in my mind, made no sense. The processor didn't make any sense as a class, mainly because of these reasons:
These are made complicated by the fact that the behaviors of the processor are essentially private. the
#process
and#process_all
methods are not meant to be public, so describing how the processor "behaves" publicly is awkward.However, in interest of compatibility, I've kept the processor as a class, and instead defined
AST::Processor::Module
, which contains the previous processor behavior.AST::Processor
is now just a class that includesAST::Processor::Module
.Anyway, nice library. Cheers!