From: leon breedt <bitserf@...>
Date: 2005-03-01T12:19:35+09:00
Subject: Re: structuring complexly-interdependent C/Ruby libraries

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 00:50:29 +0900, Eric Peden <eric@ericpeden.com> wrote:
> This was suggested by several people (thanks, Pit and Leon!), and not
> only captures the essence of Ruby, but would work quite well... if it
> weren't for my need for inheritance, as you point out shortly. I
> _could_ also create "empty" versions of my superclasses in C, but then
> I'm recreating the inheritance hierarchy again. Or...
I'm not sure you need to recreate it:

class Super
end

class Test < Super
  def one
    puts "one!"
  end
end

t1 = Test.new

class Test
  def two
    puts "two!"
  end
end

t2 = Test.new

puts t1.class.ancestors.inspect
puts t2.class.ancestors.inspect


It appears that Ruby "remembers" the ancestry from the first time that
class was defined using that name.

So if you define it in C first, and in your Ruby code, require the
extension before redefining the classes, you don't need to recreate
the inheritance hierarchy.

Leon