«

Hello Group,

I think that ruby is a bit too intelligent regarding module names.
Consider the follwing situation

module B
class B; end
end

module A
module B
module C
class C < B::B; end
end
end
end

This does not work, as ruby tries to load A::B::B instead of B::B as
I supposed. So for example I can't create a class structure

module MyProg
module UI
module Gnome
class Something < Gnome::Canvas
end
end
end

even though this would seem a natural naming scheme to me.

What is the reason behind this behaviour, and is it possible to avoid
this problem without renaming my module to MyProg::UI::GnomeUI which
seems redundant to me?

regards,

Brian Schröder

--
Brian Schröder
http://www.brian-schroeder.de/
http://ruby.brian-schroeder.de/

On Tuesday 24 August 2004 07:01 am, Brian Schroeder wrote:
module B
class B; end
end

module A
module B
module C
class C < ::B::B; end
end
end
end


(I think, but never have tried)

--
T.

"Brian Schroeder" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news. ..
> Hello Group,
>
> I think that ruby is a bit too intelligent regarding module names.

No, that's usual scope resolution practice as found in other languages (C++
etc.). Module resolution starts always at the nearest possible position,
which makes perfectly sense since it saves a lot of typing for the usual
case, i.e. when you want to refer to something in a sibling module.

> Consider the follwing situation
>
> module B
> class B; end
> end
>
> module A
> module B
> module C
> class C < B::B; end

As Mr. T already pointed out use the form ::B::B to explicitely start lookup
from the top level.

> end
> end
> end
>
> This does not work, as ruby tries to load A::B::B instead of B::B as
> I supposed. So for example I can't create a class structure
>
> module MyProg
> module UI
> module Gnome
> class Something < Gnome::Canvas
> end
> end
> end
>
> even though this would seem a natural naming scheme to me.
>
> What is the reason behind this behaviour, and is it possible to avoid
> this problem without renaming my module to MyProg::UI::GnomeUI which
> seems redundant to me?

See above.

Regards

robert

> As Mr. T already pointed out use the form ::B::B to explicitely start
> lookup from the top level.

Thank you all for the replies. This was a very helpful information. I just never
read that ::X::Y starts at the top level - so as always it was not ruby too
intelligent, but I missed the important point.

regards,

Brian


--
Brian Schröder
http://www.brian-schroeder.de/