From: Brian Candler <b.candler@...>
Date: 2010-07-14T17:13:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Shouldn't this be called a global constant?

Colin Bartlett wrote:
> The following is intended to test my understanding, and any corrections 
> are
> welcome.
> 
> 1. A constant has a "constant" reference to an object. You can change 
> the
> "internal" state of that object, and Ruby won't object or warn you.
> 
> 2. Ruby lets you change the object that a constant "refers to", albeit 
> with
> a warning.
> 
> irb
> CK = "actor"       #=> "actor"
> CK << " - Salome"  #=> "actor - Salome"
> CK = "actress"  #=> warning: already initialized constant CK
>                 #=> "actress"

Yes, that's all correct.

String#replace and File#reopen are useful in these cases.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.