From: "headius (Charles Nutter)" Date: 2012-11-05T14:17:49+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:48882] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4085] Refinements and nested methods Issue #4085 has been updated by headius (Charles Nutter). I currently don't see any way to support enabling refinements in blocks without a global, unavoidable impact to all call sites. If refinements are applied lexically, then a block suddenly having refinements active does not make sense, since the code in the block is not lexically surrounded by a scope with active refinements. If refinements are applied based on the cref module, then a block still can't see them because cref for the block is determined lexically. This was explicitly done to allow constant lookup to always proceed based on lexical scopes. Formally, the clearest way for refinements to work is for you to explicitly opt into them everywhere you want to use them. A couple thoughts about different forms: 1. using as a scope-opening keyword like "class" or "module": using RSpec describe "Some Spec" do it "does some RSpec things" do # "it" comes from refinements 'foo'.should == 'foo' # "should" comes from refinements end end end This is clear to the user and the parser that all calls downstream from the "using" must consider refinements. They would see the refinements based on cref (or something similar) because of the explicit nesting of scopes. 2. "using" as a pseudo-keyword, affecting lexical scopes and code following "using" using RSpec describe "Some Spec" do it "does some RSpec things" do # "it" comes from refinements 'foo'.should == 'foo' # "should" comes from refinements end end In this case, the parser could still treat all calls following "using" as needing refinements. This is less ideal, because it force us to treat all "using" calls everywhere in the system as potentially triggering refined call sites. It also makes it impossible to detect if "using" is ever aliased or sent. If such features are expected, we'd be back to treating all calls as refined all the time. Honestly, I really believe that allowing refinements to affect scopes that have no "using" anywhere in sight is going to be really confusing, and it has the added pain of making efficient call site caching hard or impossible. ---------------------------------------- Feature #4085: Refinements and nested methods https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4085#change-32371 Author: shugo (Shugo Maeda) Status: Assigned Priority: Normal Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) Category: core Target version: 2.0.0 =begin As I said at RubyConf 2010, I'd like to propose a new features called "Refinements." Refinements are similar to Classboxes. However, Refinements doesn't support local rebinding as mentioned later. In this sense, Refinements might be more similar to selector namespaces, but I'm not sure because I have never seen any implementation of selector namespaces. In Refinements, a Ruby module is used as a namespace (or classbox) for class extensions. Such class extensions are called refinements. For example, the following module refines Fixnum. module MathN refine Fixnum do def /(other) quo(other) end end end Module#refine(klass) takes one argument, which is a class to be extended. Module#refine also takes a block, where additional or overriding methods of klass can be defined. In this example, MathN refines Fixnum so that 1 / 2 returns a rational number (1/2) instead of an integer 0. This refinement can be enabled by the method using. class Foo using MathN def foo p 1 / 2 end end f = Foo.new f.foo #=> (1/2) p 1 / 2 In this example, the refinement in MathN is enabled in the definition of Foo. The effective scope of the refinement is the innermost class, module, or method where using is called; however the refinement is not enabled before the call of using. If there is no such class, module, or method, then the effective scope is the file where using is called. Note that refinements are pseudo-lexically scoped. For example, foo.baz prints not "FooExt#bar" but "Foo#bar" in the following code: class Foo def bar puts "Foo#bar" end def baz bar end end module FooExt refine Foo do def bar puts "FooExt#bar" end end end module Quux using FooExt foo = Foo.new foo.bar # => FooExt#bar foo.baz # => Foo#bar end Refinements are also enabled in reopened definitions of classes using refinements and definitions of their subclasses, so they are *pseudo*-lexically scoped. class Foo using MathN end class Foo # MathN is enabled in a reopened definition. p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end class Bar < Foo # MathN is enabled in a subclass definition. p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end If a module or class is using refinements, they are enabled in module_eval, class_eval, and instance_eval if the receiver is the class or module, or an instance of the class. module A using MathN end class B using MathN end MathN.module_eval do p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end A.module_eval do p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end B.class_eval do p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end B.new.instance_eval do p 1 / 2 #=> (1/2) end Besides refinements, I'd like to propose new behavior of nested methods. Currently, the scope of a nested method is not closed in the outer method. def foo def bar puts "bar" end bar end foo #=> bar bar #=> bar In Ruby, there are no functions, but only methods. So there are no right places where nested methods are defined. However, if refinements are introduced, a refinement enabled only in the outer method would be the right place. For example, the above code is almost equivalent to the following code: def foo klass = self.class m = Module.new { refine klass do def bar puts "bar" end end } using m bar end foo #=> bar bar #=> NoMethodError The attached patch is based on SVN trunk r29837. =end -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/