From: sawadatsuyoshi@... Date: 2016-05-14T08:28:40+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:75502] [Ruby trunk Feature#12380] `Struct` as a subclass of `Class` Issue #12380 has been updated by Tsuyoshi Sawada. Jeremy Evans wrote: > You can't subclass Class in ruby: I see. > do you think there would be any practical benefits to changing things? At the moment, my motivation is only conceptual. We are able to do things the way it is now, but from OOP point of view, it is not desirable. It is just as good as getting rid of `Bignum` and `Fixnum` in favor of `Integer`. Since the developers are doing this kind of thing right now, I thought maybe it is good timing to ask things like I proposed. > the reason that Struct is not a subclass of Class is that you can't subclass Class, maybe because allowing subclasses of Class would cause problems in the object model? I understand the difficulty of freely allowing subclassing of `Class`. But what about only allowing hard-wired subclasses such as `Struct` (and `SingletonClass` that I proposed in #12374), and not allowing other subclassing? ---------------------------------------- Feature #12380: `Struct` as a subclass of `Class` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12380#change-58618 * Author: Tsuyoshi Sawada * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- This issue is somewhat of the same flavor as #12374. `Struct` has a constructor that creates a class: ~~~ruby Struct.new(:foo) # => # ~~~ and this is the same situation with `Class`. ~~~ruby Class.new # => # ~~~ Hence, most naturally, `Struct` should be a subclass of `Class`. But in reality, it isn't: ~~~ruby Struct.ancestors # => [Struct, Enumerable, Object, Kernel, BasicObject] ~~~ The current structure around `Struct` is counter-intuitive to me. I propose that either `Struct` should be redefined as a subclass of `Class`, or a new class `StructClass` should be introduced as a subclass of `Class`, and take over the functionality of `Struct`. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: