From: Josh Cheek <josh.cheek@...>
Date: 2011-05-28T21:39:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Unexpected behavior when referencing nested classes

--e0cb4e88758f1f2df404a45558a6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 7:21 AM, John Feminella <johnf@bitsbuilder.com>wrote:

> It was my understanding that consts are first searched for in their
> own module scope before Ruby starts looking elsewhere. So, if you have
> a class called X in a module M1::M2 and another one at top level, and
> you're inside M1::M2, then referencing X gets you M1::M2::X.
>
> This doesn't appear to be the case though:
>
> ruby-1.9.2-p0 :001 > module Foo; end
>  => nil
> ruby-1.9.2-p0 :002 > module Foo::Bar; class Baz; end; end
>  => nil
> ruby-1.9.2-p0 :003 > class Baz; def say; "::Baz"; end; end
>  => nil
> ruby-1.9.2-p0 :004 > class Foo::Bar::Baz; def say; "::Foo::Bar::Baz";
> end; def x; Baz.new.say; end; end
>  => nil
>
> # expected "Foo::Bar::Baz"
> ruby-1.9.2-p0 :005 > Foo::Bar::Baz.new.x
>  => "::Baz"
>
> Have I misunderstood how constants work?
>
> ~ jf
> --
> John Feminella
> Principal Consultant, BitsBuilder
> LI: http://www.linkedin.com/in/johnxf
> SO: http://stackoverflow.com/users/75170/
>
>

I have some vague hypotheses about why it does this, but don't have any idea
how to test them.



module Foo
end

module Foo::Bar
  class Baz
  end
end

class Baz
  def say
    "::Baz"
  end
end


# gives the unexpected result
class Foo::Bar::Baz
  def say
    "::Foo::Bar::Baz"
  end
  def x # !> previous definition of x was here
    Baz.new.say
  end
end

Foo::Bar::Baz.new.x # => "::Baz"


# gives the expected result
module Foo::Bar
  class Baz
    def x # !> method redefined; discarding old x
      Baz.new.say
    end
  end
end

Foo::Bar::Baz.new.x # => "::Foo::Bar::Baz"

--e0cb4e88758f1f2df404a45558a6--