Jay Fields has envisioned a beautiful future for software development with his EDRY dialect of Ruby. But what is Enhanced DRY without better CoC (Convention over Configuration)?
I have modified Jay's code to rely more on convention. Why have a distinct vocabulary for fields vs. mixins, when the right thing to do can be inferred from the types involved? The result is some really tight code:
I am including the full source at the bottom of this entry. Can you make it even DRYer and more convention-driven?
We are a collection of experienced, thoughtful technologists, passionate about helping organizations deploy
technology effectively and humanely to build better futures. We like to work with you on the hard stuff.