From: Leslie Viljoen <leslieviljoen@...>
Date: 2007-04-14T08:31:44+09:00
Subject: Re: Invisible methods and inheritance

On 4/14/07, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 13, 2007, at 15:42 , Leslie Viljoen wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > Does anyone know the reason for the following?
> >
> > p rio('.').all.dirs.methods.include?("each")
> > p rio('.').all.dirs.methods.respond_to?("each")
> >
> >> false
> >> true
>
> I think you meant:
>
> p rio('.').all.dirs.respond_to?("each")
>
> you don't want to ask the result of methods if IT responds to each,
> you want to ask the result of dirs.
>
> > I can call dirs.each, but I am trying to trace which .each method is
> > called in the rio source.
>
> Don't forget that things like method_missing (and even respond_to?)
> can be overridden.
>
> > Also how can I find the parent/superclass
> > class of a class?  (ie. something like Array.parent?)
>
>  >> Array.superclass
> => Object
>
> Remember, ri is your friend, just ask it what you asked us and you'll
> often find your answer:
>
> % ri superclass
> ------------------------------------------------------- Class#superclass
>       class.superclass -> a_super_class or nil
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>       Returns the superclass of _class_, or +nil+.
>
>          File.superclass     #=> IO
>          IO.superclass       #=> Object
>          Object.superclass   #=> nil
>


Thanks Ryan. It seems I am much more tired than I thought I was ;-)


-- 
If you could create a machine that copies hamburgers � you put one
hamburger in and two equally good hamburgers come out the other side �
it would be unethical not to do so and make it freely available.