From: dblack@...
Date: 2003-08-13T20:39:28+09:00
Subject: Re: Nested class/module namespace

Hi --

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

> Nathaniel has identified a difference between the two cases above when one
> tries to access a constant, say X::C (which is not defined in the above
> code).
>
> If there is a difference, then there must be a difference in the
> "execution context".  To my way of thinking, the only thing that should be
> important in an execution context is the value of "self".  If that is not
> the case, we need an explanation, and probably a justification.  At the
> moment, I think the elegance of Ruby is being stretched a bit.

Keep in mind, though, that this isn't the only such situation in Ruby.
See my previous post with the class_eval example; also, here's another
situation where 'self' can be the same but visibility of constants is
different:

  class C
    X=1
  end

  c = C.new

  class << c
    def a; p self; p X; end
  end

  def c.b; p self; p X; end

  c.a
  c.b                           # error: unknown constant X

(Having several such situations may not make it more attractive to
you, but I just wanted to get this one on the radar.)


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack@superlink.net
work: blackdav@shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav