Hacker News Reader

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.

> 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.

Object without state but with functions is just a namespace. But that depends on how the language implements it.

In Ruby that looks a lot like what the article says is an anti-pattern.

In Ruby, that basically comes down to creating a static class.