[ruby-core:38826] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5148][Open] Constant Namespace/Scoping in Dynamic Classes/Modules

Hi,
On 2 August 2011 17:01, Thomas Sawyer <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Bug #5148: Constant Namespace/Scoping in Dynamic Classes/Modules
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5148
>
> When defining a dynamic class or module, the constants defined within it are not kept within it's namespace, but are tied to the outer scope's namespace.
>
>  = Class.new do
> odule M; end
> nd
> => #<Class:0xa601300>
> ::M => M
>  #=> M

I also noticed that recently.
It seems inconsistent to me.
Let's have some code:
https://gist.github.com/1129567

Constant scoping seems to depend on the the fact it is defined in a
"dynamic" scope or not.
But one can force to define on a specific scope by doing scope::Const
= value (like self::C = value in a Class.new block).

I think the constant definition scope should always be the current
scope (as you would always add "self::" before the constant name).
Also, this should be true for constant resolution, I should not need
self.class::CONST, in a parent class to resolve a child class's
constant.

To "solve" your problem, you could use self::

describe "unfancy mixin" do
  class self::Foo # not at toplevel
    include UnfancyMixin
  end
  # Foo # uninitialized constant Foo (NameError)
  self::Foo # => #<Class:0x00000100857ba8>::Foo
  const_get :Foo # => #<Class:0x00000100857ba8>::Foo
end

But it has an immediate pitfall: you can not reference it by 'Foo',
you need 'self::Foo' or 'const_get :Foo'.

Variables and method calls are fully dynamic for
definition/resolution, in opposition to constants.

Can someone explain the rationale behind this logic ?