From: Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Date: 2005-11-23T04:02:50+09:00
Subject: Re: C extensions and class constants nested within modules

Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> writes:

>>>>>>>"D" == Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> writes:
>> D> Why doesn't that work?
>>  Because this is parse.y and eval.c which make work
>>    class Bar::Baz
>>    end
>>  and not the call to rb_define_class()
>>  With rb_define_class("Bar::Baz"), ruby has defined a class
>> "Bar::Baz" and
>>  not a class Baz under Bar (what it look with Foo::Bar::Baz)
>> D> The only way I could get it to work was to declare "Baz" under
>> "Bar".  But is D> that really the same thing?
>>  In your case probably.
>
> What's the difference between these two?
>
> module Foo
>     class Bar
>     end
>     class Bar::Baz
>     end
> end
>
> module Foo
>     class Bar
>        class Baz
>        end
>     end
> end
>
> Is there any difference?  What are the potential pitfalls, if any?

You could hit issues with constant lookup, but from a code point
of view they should be the same.

> Dan
-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org