From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2004-02-01T21:00:47+09:00
Subject: Re: Constant visibility

On Sunday, February 1, 2004, 10:19:53 PM, Robert wrote:


>> The problem is that when you use 'class M::C' to open a class, you
>> can't access constants declared in M, whereas if you use 'module M;
>> class C', you can.
>>
>> 1) Why is this?

> Because when doing "class M::C" you're still in another scope while defining
> class C.  So you have to explicitely scope constants from module M. (see
> below)

"Another scope"?  Sounds convincing, but I don't know what it means.
'self' is the same object in the following two examples:

  module M
    class C
      p self.id
    end
  end

  class M::C
    p self.id
  end

>> 2) Is is an intentional behaviour of Ruby?

> I think so.

Can it be justified in terms of correctness, language design
principles, POLS, convenience, expedience, or anything else?

To my mind, the way things work (scope-wise) should depend on the
value of 'self' and little if not nothing else.

Cheers,
Gavin