[ruby-core:46331] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6722] Weird behavior of defined?(super) check invoked from a metaprogrammatically defined class method

Issue #6722 has been updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada).

Category set to core
Target version set to 2.0.0
% Done changed from 0 to 100


----------------------------------------
Bug #6722: Weird behavior of defined?(super) check invoked from a metaprogrammatically defined class method
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6722#change-27951

Author: alexisowl (Alexey Smolianinov)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: core
Target version: 2.0.0
ruby -v: ruby 1.9.3p0 (2011-10-30 revision 33570) [i686-linux]


=begin
Hi guys,

Sorry for the duplicate - I already reported ((<this issue|URL:https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6644)>))
2 weeks ago, but didn't receive any answer.
I had mistakenly assigned "target version", maybe that was the reason 
of no response? Please let me know if my bug report is wrong or irrelevant 
in any other respect.

Here's a link to the discussion of the issue on stackoverflow: 
((<URL:http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11180909>))

Bellow is my initial description:

--

Lately I came across some weird behavior with the (({defined?})) operator used to check if (({super})) keyword can be invoked in current context. Usually it works fine, but when I tried to combine the (({defined? super})) check with a tiny bit of metaprogramming, it gave me unexpected results.

    class A; 
      def self.def_f!; 
        singleton_class.send(:define_method, :f) { defined? super }
      end
    end
    class AA < A; end

    A.def_f!

    A.f  # => nil
    AA.f # => nil

    AA.def_f!

    AA.f # => "super"
    A.f  # => "super" - WHY???

The last result is really strange, isn't it?

(({A.f})) has no super method, so I would expect the last (({A.f})) to return (({nil})).
=end


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