# Module design acceptable practices questions **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [September 29, 2010, 8:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/module-design-acceptable-practices-questions/195766 "2010-09-29T20:56:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mydarkpassenger](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@mydarkpassenger](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mydarkpassenger)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2010, 8:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/module-design-acceptable-practices-questions/195766/1 "2010-09-29T20:56:30Z")
Module design acceptable practices questions… 1. Is it “accepted” practice to prohibit a particular module from being extended or included? Or should a module, “normally” be able to be included and extended? 2. Is it an “accepted” practice to both include AND extend a module in a given class? ---
**Author:** ![mydarkpassenger](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@mydarkpassenger](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mydarkpassenger)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2010, 10:37pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/module-design-acceptable-practices-questions/195766/2 "2010-09-29T22:37:50Z")
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Gene A. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Module design acceptable practices questions… > > 1. Is it “accepted” practice to prohibit a particular module from being > extended or included? Or should a module, “normally” be able to be > included and extended? I cannot recall having seen a module implementer attempt this. If at all I guess it is a rather rare practice to try to do this and frankly I believe this does not fit very well to Ruby’s otherwise rather relaxed approach (e.g. you can get around private methods rather easily). > 1. Is it an “accepted” practice to both include AND extend a module in a > given class? I would only do one or the other but I might have seen other examples. Kind regards robert