From: "shugo (Shugo Maeda)" Date: 2012-12-08T22:24:23+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:50694] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4085] Refinements and nested methods Issue #4085 has been updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda). matz wrote: > |* Should not send, method, respond_to? use refinements? > | I've changed Symbol#to_proc not to use refinements, but it might be better these three methods to use refinements. > > For 2.0, any indirect method access need not to honor refinements. Does "need not" mean an implementation may honor refinements? Or does it mean just any indirect method access shall not honor refinements? > |* Should Module#include inherit refinements? > > Not for 2.0. I see. > |* Should Module#refinements be removed? > > Yes, it's not included in the latest spec. The spec at https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/wiki/RefinementsSpec has a placeholder for Module#refinements, but I'll remove it. > |* In CRuby, refine(klass, &proc) raises an ArgumentError. Should it be the spec? > > I guess so, but it's not worth to overhaul for JRuby and Rubinius. If it's difficult in other implementations to raise an ArgumentError, the behavior should be unspecified instead of implementation-defined because "unspecified" implies that an error might occur. ---------------------------------------- Feature #4085: Refinements and nested methods https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4085#change-34540 Author: shugo (Shugo Maeda) Status: Assigned Priority: Normal Assignee: shugo (Shugo Maeda) 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/