From: darren kirby <bulliver@...>
Date: 2007-06-30T06:20:02+09:00
Subject: Re: Issue related to class initialization and irb

quoth the Chris Shea:
> On Jun 29, 11:17 am, darren kirby <bulli...@badcomputer.org> wrote:
> > This is a follow-up question for me as well. Even when the object_id
> > value is represented in hex it does not match the default output. I guess
> > the default value is the object's address in memory or somesuch?
>
> The hex value is double the object_id.  So in my example, redefining
> inspect as
>
> "#<Test:0x#{(self.object_id*2).to_s(16)}>"
>
> would give you what you're expecting.
>
> Chris

Thanks again Chris.

I still have one more issue here. My knowledge of access control is admittedly 
superficial, but since 'inspect' is called internally I should be able to 
define it as a private method shouldn't I? Or is it bombing because it is 
called from irb?

When I define it privately I get:
-----------------------
irb(main):016:0> song = FlacInfo.new("test.flac")
NoMethodError: private method `inspect' called for #<FlacInfo:0x6f919ec4>
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:298:in `output_value'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:151:in `eval_input'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:259:in `signal_status'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:147:in `eval_input'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb/ruby-lex.rb:244:in 
`each_top_level_statement'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb/ruby-lex.rb:230:in `loop'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb/ruby-lex.rb:230:in 
`each_top_level_statement'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb/ruby-lex.rb:229:in `catch'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb/ruby-lex.rb:229:in 
`each_top_level_statement'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:146:in `eval_input'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:70:in `start'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:69:in `catch'
        from /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/irb.rb:69:in `start'
        from /usr/bin/irb:13
Maybe IRB bug!!
-------------------------
Is this really a bug or is it just a necessary product of calling from irb? 

I don't really need or want this as a public method. I suppose I could just 
make it so Rdoc doesn't document it, as it isn't like it is going to hurt 
anything if called directly.

-d
-- 
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972