From: "fxn (Xavier Noria)" <noreply@...>
Date: 2022-06-15T21:49:40+00:00
Subject: [ruby-core:108942] [Ruby master Bug#18832] Suspicious superclass mismatch

Issue #18832 has been updated by fxn (Xavier Noria).


You're right, it happens too if the first element of the nesting is `Object`.

For context, this happened in a Rails application that had `app/models/comment.rb`, which worked regularly fine. However, in a `.rake` file the project had `include REXML` at the top-level and in Rake tasks the application could no longer define the `Comment` model due to the superclass mismatch. REXML [documents](https://github.com/ruby/rexml) such top-level include. This is debatable, but cannot distract from discussing the consistency of the pure lookup logic.

If `Object` does not have `Comment`, I expect `class Comment; end` to define a new class, as in any other "namespace".



----------------------------------------
Bug #18832: Suspicious superclass mismatch
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18832#change-98030

* Author: fxn (Xavier Noria)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
The following code:

```ruby
module M
  class C
  end
end

include M

p Object.const_defined?(:C, false)

class C < String # (1)
end
```

prints `false`, as expected, but then raises `superclass mismatch for class C (TypeError)` at (1).

I believe this is a bug, because `Object` itself does not have a `C` constant, so (1) should just work, and the superclasse of `M::C` should be irrelevant.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>