From: Kornelius Kalnbach <redmine@...>
Date: 2010-02-13T02:17:23+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:28157] [Feature #2740] Extend const_missing to pass in the nesting

Issue #2740 has been updated by Kornelius Kalnbach.


> In order to achieve this, I propose that we extend the const_missing
> method to take an optional second parameter containing the nesting:
> 
>     class Foo
>       class Bar
>         def self.const_missing(id, nesting)
>           id == :Baz
>           nesting == [Foo::Bar] # first case
>           nesting == [Foo::Bar, Foo] # second case
>         end
>       end
>     end
> 
> This would allow people who wish to do their own custom constant
> loading (such as Rails) to do so in a way that is consistent with Ruby's
> own constant lookup. In order to avoid backward-compatibility issues, we
> can check the arity of the const_missing method, and only pass in the
> nesting if a second parameter was provided.
Interesting idea. However, I see two problems with the proposal:

1. It changes the const_missing API, breaking code. It would be nice to 
   find a way around this.

2. The feature Module.nesting is dependent on the "point of the call".
   As you described, const_missing is not. I'm not sure about the 
   implications; Module.nesting is defined in eval.c, while 
   const_missing and const_get are defined in variable.c.

There may be another way around this. method_missing makes it possible to use Ruby's inheritance chain again by calling super. So, what if we just follow the constant lookup nesting chain again when const_missing didn't return anything?

You wouldn't even have to write the logic yourself. The implementation could look something like this:

  class Module
    # classic-style const_missing
    def const_missing(id)
      namespace = "#{name}::" unless self == Object
      puts "Searching for #{namespace}#{id}..."
      nil
    end
  end

  class Module
    # new-style constant lookup, given nesting
    # This would have to be implemented in C.
    def const_get2 id, nesting
      nesting += [Object]  # Don't forget top level.
      # As usual: Try to find existing constant (without const_missing).
      for mod in nesting
        # imitating constant lookup without const_missing
        if mod.constants.map { |c| c.to_sym }.include? id.to_sym
          return mod.const_get(id)
        end
      end
      # New style: Call const_missing on each nesting level.
      for mod in nesting
        value = mod.const_missing id
        return value if value
      end
      # As usual: Raise NameError if nothing was found.
      raise NameError, "uninitialized constant #{name}::#{id}"
    end
  end

  class Foo
    class Bar
      const_get2(:Baz, Module.nesting)
      # >> Searching for Foo::Bar::Baz...
      # >> Searching for Foo::Baz...
      # >> Searching for Baz...
      #~> uninitialized constant Foo::Bar::Baz (NameError)
    end
  end

  class Foo::Bar
    const_get2(:Baz, Module.nesting)
    # >> Searching for Foo::Bar::Baz...
    # >> Searching for Baz...
    #~> uninitialized constant Foo::Bar::Baz (NameError)
  end

This solves 1., but not 2. Calling const_get and would still depend on Module.nesting.

Also, a constant with a value of nil or false would be interpreted as "not found". Maybe we could define a protocol for this, something like StopIteration?

  NoConstantError = Class.new NameError

  class Module
    def const_missing(id)
      ...
      raise NoConstantError
    end
  end

  class Module
    def const_get2 id, nesting
      ...
      for mod in nesting
        begin
          return mod.const_missing(id)
        rescue NoConstantError
          # continue
        end
      end
      ...
    end
  end

On the other hand, maybe implicit constant lookup through the module nesting *and* automatic loading is a bit too much ;-)
----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2740

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org