From: Todd Corenson <todd@...>
Date: 2007-11-06T09:49:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Superclass of a module

Does this make Foo a singleton class of Module?  This would explain how 
Foo could respond to super, yet have no superclass.  But this would 
still be strange because

module Foo
  def self.append_features(b)
    super
  end
end

would make append_features a module method and yet 
Module.new.respond_to?(:append_features, true) is true.  For a class, 
this implies that append_features would be an instance method.  I take 
it this works differently for modules?

Mental Guy wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:38:01 +0900, Todd Corenson <todd@browsersys.com> 
> wrote:
>> Is this where append_features is actually defined?  And if user-defined
>> modules have superclasses, why don't the superclass and ancestors
>> methods report this class?
> 
> Foo.append_features works because Foo is a Module (Foo.class == Module),
> and Module#append_features is defined, the same way it would work for
> any other sort of object.
> 
> Classes are the only special case; if Bar were a class, calling e.g.
> Bar.hoge would also search the singleton methods defined on the classes 
> in
> Bar.ancestors, in addition to searching the regular instance methods on
> Bar.class.ancestors.
> 
> -mental

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.