From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2004-08-25T00:35:42+09:00
Subject: Re: Module Scopes and Names


"Brian Schroeder" <spam0504@bssoftware.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:pan.2004.08.24.10.58.57.712590@bssoftware.de...
> Hello Group,
>
> I think that ruby is a bit too intelligent regarding module names.

No, that's usual scope resolution practice as found in other languages (C++
etc.).  Module resolution starts always at the nearest possible position,
which makes perfectly sense since it saves a lot of typing for the usual
case, i.e. when you want to refer to something in a sibling module.

> Consider the follwing situation
>
> module B
> class B; end
> end
>
> module A
> module B
> module C
> class C < B::B; end

As Mr. T already pointed out use the form ::B::B to explicitely start lookup
from the top level.

> end
> end
> end
>
> This does not work, as ruby tries to load A::B::B instead of B::B as
> I supposed. So for example I can't create a class structure
>
> module MyProg
>   module UI
>     module Gnome
>       class Something < Gnome::Canvas
> end
> end
> end
>
> even though this would seem a natural naming scheme to me.
>
> What is the reason behind this behaviour, and is it possible to avoid
> this problem without renaming my module to MyProg::UI::GnomeUI which
> seems redundant to me?

See above.

Regards

    robert