From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2003-12-02T21:13:01+09:00
Subject: Re: Class-level readers and writers

Hi --

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Christoph wrote:

> David A. Black wrote:
> ...
> > > ...
> > > > > In the original discussion what we call "class local" instance 
> > > > > variables
> > > > 
> > > > OK... but then they're "class local variables", right, not "class 
> > > > local instance variables"?  (since they're visible inside method 
> > > > definitions).
> > > 
> > > Yes, I just wanted to be "�ber" correct and added the collectively 
> > > swallowed "instance" part - since they are "kind_of" an instance 
> > > variable.
> > 
> > Although... I think that if a variable's scope is a superset 
> 
> Nope it's a subset of today's instance variables ...

I thought that a class local variable was going to be visible to the
Class object and its instance:

  class C
    @_v = 1
    puts @_v      # 1
    def m
      puts @_v    # 1
    end
  end

which would mean it has a wider scope than an instance variable:

  class C
    @v = 1
    puts @v      # 1
    def m
      puts @v    # nil  (self's @v, not C's @v)
    end
  end

?


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net