From: Carlos <angus@...>
Date: 2005-05-05T08:34:32+09:00
Subject: Re: [RCR] Object#inside_metaclass?

[Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov, 2005-05-05 00.15 CEST]
> >def inside?
> >    self.is_a?(Class) &&
> >    self.name.empty?
> >    self.ancestors.first != self
> >end
> 
> ha!  first i noticed you made a typo (the first two lines are a no-op 
> without
> another '&&') - and then i ran it anyhow.  funny thing is it seems the last
> line is all that's needed (if defined in Class)!

Yes, the #name thing was a leftover of some experiments trying to
distinguish between singleton classes of classes and the others
(unsuccessful). (This version was already in [ruby-talk:140408]...)

> not bad!  why do you suppose metaclasses don't have themselves as ancestors?
> or perhaps put a better way - why DO normal classes?

I think Joel VanderWerf's explanation is the most likely.