From: "robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson)" <rob@...>
Date: 2012-11-21T23:56:26+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:49815] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7414] Now that const_get supports "Foo::Bar" syntax, so should const_defined?.


Issue #7414 has been updated by robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson).


robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson) wrote:
> I realise defined? with a constant works just as well but this is about API consistency.
> I'd expect const_get & const_defined? to support the same syntax ("Object::Foo").


----------------------------------------
Feature #7414: Now that const_get supports "Foo::Bar" syntax, so should const_defined?.
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7414#change-33399

Author: robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 2.0.0


class Foo
end
Object.const_get "Object::Foo" => Foo
Object.const_defined? "Object::Foo" => NameError (expected true).


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