From: Gennady <gfb@...>
Date: 2003-01-22T04:18:48+09:00
Subject: Re: Mixins

Thanks to everybody for explanation. My mistake was to expect something
happen magically. Now that I think how the whole mixin mechanism works I see
why modules and classes in my example behaved that way. It explains
everything. The bottom line is: when you want something done -- do it
yourself ;-), that what append_features is there for.

Gennady.
(Thank you Lyle, too, for the off-list suggestion)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel VanderWerf" <vjoel@PATH.Berkeley.EDU>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: Mixins


> Gennady wrote:
> > I am completely lost -- it looks like it is not possible to redefine a
> > method at all with a mixin:
> >
> > class Test
> >   def foo
> >      puts "Test#foo"
> >   end
> > end
> >
> > module Mixin
> >   def foo
> >     puts "Mixin#foo"
> >   end
> >   def bar
> >     puts "Mixin#bar"
> >   end
> > end
> >
> > class Test
> >   include Mixin
> > end
> >
> > Test.new.foo  #==> Test#foo
> > Test.new.bar  #==> Mixin#bar
> >
> > So new method are added just fine, however a method I would like to
> > redefine stays the same. Is it how it was supposed to work? And how to
> > actually do redefine a method? Should there be any tricks involved, like
> > aliasing?
>
> Test.ancestors #==> [Test, Mixin, Object, Kernel]
>
> So actually, your Test#foo is replacing Mixin#foo, because Test occurs
> before Mixin on the method search path.
>
> class Test
>    def foo
>      super
>    end
> end
>
> Test.new.foo  #==> Mixin#foo
>
>
>
>
>