Forum: Ruby built-in vs. standard library

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Mark V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-04 22:58
(Received via mailing list)
I'm confused about whether the Date class is built-in or in the
standard library.

I can use it without requiring it in irb, so that tells me it's
built-in.
Pickaxe doesn't document it in the "Built-in Classes and Modules"
reference chapter.
Pickaxe does document a Date class in the "Standard Library" chapter.
Are there two different date classes?
Should I be able to determine this by looking at source files under
the lib/ruby/1.8 directory?
It's seems like those source files are all for standard library classes.
True?
James G. (Guest)
on 2006-02-04 23:13
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 4, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Mark V. wrote:

> I'm confused about whether the Date class is built-in or in the
> standard library.

It's a standard library.

> I can use it without requiring it in irb, so that tells me it's
> built-in.

Na, that tells you that irb requires it somewhere.  :)

James Edward G. II
Wilson B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-04 23:19
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/4/06, James Edward G. II <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Na, that tells you that irb requires it somewhere.  :)
>

Actually, it's a little weirder than that.  I've wondered about it
myself:

irb(main):001:0> Date.methods(false)
=> ["zone_to_diff", "_parse", "_strptime"]
irb(main):002:0> Date.today
NoMethodError: undefined method `today' for Date:Class
        from (irb):2
irb(main):003:0> require 'date'
=> true
irb(main):004:0> Date.today
=> #<Date: 4907541/2,0,2299161>
irb(main):005:0> Date.methods(false)
=> ["jd_to_ajd", "ld_to_jd", "ordinal", "ajd_to_amjd", "new0", "jd",
"valid_ordinal?", "exist2?", "e
xist?", "jd_to_civil", "jd_to_wday", "gregorian_leap?",
"valid_commercial?", "parse", "new3", "os?",
 "commercial_to_jd", "jd_to_mjd", "valid_civil?", "new",
"zone_to_diff", "jd_to_ordinal", "valid_jd?
", "commercial", "exist1?", "day_fraction_to_time", "jd_to_ld",
"julian_leap?", "today", "new2", "_p
arse", "existw?", "ordinal_to_jd", "amjd_to_ajd", "ns?",
"civil_to_jd", "ajd_to_jd", "valid_date?",
"new1", "_strptime", "jd_to_commercial", "mjd_to_jd", "strptime",
"exist3?", "time_to_day_fraction",
 "leap?", "civil", "_load", "neww"]
irb(main):006:0>
Mark V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 01:56
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/4/06, James Edward G. II <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Na, that tells you that irb requires it somewhere.  :)
Then why does this code run?

d = Date.new
puts "d is a #{d.class}"

This is telling me that there is a built-in Date class and there is
another one in the Standard Library.

ruby-doc.org documents a Date class under both the "Core API" and the
"Standard API". They look very similar, but not identical. As I said
earlier, pickaxe does not document it as a built-in.

Why do there seem to be two Date classes?
Ross B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 03:15
(Received via mailing list)
On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 23:23:36 -0000, Mark V.
<removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

>>
>> Na, that tells you that irb requires it somewhere.  :)
>
> Then why does this code run?
>
> d = Date.new
> puts "d is a #{d.class}"
>
> This is telling me that there is a built-in Date class and there is
> another one in the Standard Library.
>

Just curious, what is your output from this code?

	p 1 if defined? Date
	require 'irb'
	p 2 if defined? Date
	require 'rubygems'
	p 3 if defined? Date

I just get 3 (which I think is expected). Do you require rubygems in
your
..irbrc? or $RUBYOPTS?
Matthew D. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 03:15
(Received via mailing list)
Mark V. wrote:
>>
>
> R. Mark V.
> Partner, Object Computing, Inc.
>
Hi,

I wonder if you might have required rubygems at some point.  Sifting
through rubygems:
rubygems/open-uri.rb: require 'parsedate'
parsedate.rb: require 'date/format'

So if you've got RUBYOPT set to rubygems, you'll have required rubygems
already.  Try evaluating Date::MONTHNAMES.  This constant is set in
date.rb and not date/format.rb so if you've only required data/format
then you'll have a chance to hear the uninitialized constant song.

Having required rubygems would explain the presence of the Date class in
your ruby above.

Hope that helps.  If anyone has a better idea of where the rogue Date
might be coming from, I'd love to hear it.

Regards,
Matthew J. Desmarais

P.S.  I just realized that you'll get a good idea of what (aside from
core) is in your ruby by evaluating $".  That's the array that holds the
list of files that have been require'd.
Mark V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 03:15
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/4/06, Ross B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> > This is telling me that there is a built-in Date class and there is
> > another one in the Standard Library.
> >
>
> Just curious, what is your output from this code?
>
>         p 1 if defined? Date
>         require 'irb'
>         p 2 if defined? Date
>         require 'rubygems'
>         p 3 if defined? Date

I get
1
2
3

> I just get 3 (which I think is expected). Do you require rubygems in your
> ..irbrc? or $RUBYOPTS?

I'm running Ruby 1.8.4 under Windows XP. I don't have a RUBYOPTS
environment variable set and I get the result above when I put the
code in a file and run it with "ruby myfile.rb", so I guess the .irbrc
part doesn't matter.
Mark V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 03:15
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/4/06, Matthew D. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

> P.S.  I just realized that you'll get a good idea of what (aside from
> core) is in your ruby by evaluating $".  That's the array that holds the
> list of files that have been require'd.

Good suggestion!  I tried that and I see that "rubygems.rb" is being
loaded. I just don't know why that is happening. Is that something
that automatically happens when you are using the latest version of
the Windows One Click Installer?  As was suggested earlier,
rubygems.rb ends up requiring parsedate.rb.

This still leaves the question of why ruby-doc.org documents the Date
class as being in the Core API.
Matthew D. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 03:30
(Received via mailing list)
Mark V. wrote:
> that automatically happens when you are using the latest version of
> the Windows One Click Installer?  As was suggested earlier,
> rubygems.rb ends up requiring parsedate.rb.
>
Very odd.  I noticed that earlier in the thread that you said that you
didn't have a RUBYOPTS environment variable set.  The environment
variable that will get you is actually RUBYOPT.  Is it possible that you
have this one set?  If not then you can color me puzzled.
> This still leaves the question of why ruby-doc.org documents the Date
> class as being in the Core API.
>
Oh, that?  I have no idea. ;-)

It probably shouldn't be though, eh?
Mark V. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 04:00
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/4/06, Matthew D. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > that automatically happens when you are using the latest version of
> > the Windows One Click Installer?  As was suggested earlier,
> > rubygems.rb ends up requiring parsedate.rb.
> >
> Very odd.  I noticed that earlier in the thread that you said that you
> didn't have a RUBYOPTS environment variable set.  The environment
> variable that will get you is actually RUBYOPT.  Is it possible that you
> have this one set?  If not then you can color me puzzled.

Oops!  You can color me red.  I do have RUBYOPT set and it's set to
rubygems. So that explains why the Date class is available without me
requiring it.

> > This still leaves the question of why ruby-doc.org documents the Date
> > class as being in the Core API.
> >
> Oh, that?  I have no idea. ;-)
>
> It probably shouldn't be though, eh?

Right.
James B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-05 05:03
(Received via mailing list)
Mark V. wrote:
> that automatically happens when you are using the latest version of
> the Windows One Click Installer?  As was suggested earlier,
> rubygems.rb ends up requiring parsedate.rb.
>
> This still leaves the question of why ruby-doc.org documents the Date
> class as being in the Core API.

Because I run rdoc over the base set of lib files.

If there is a better way to do this, I would be happy to change.

(What I would prefer is a single set of API files that do not require
one to know whether something is 'core' or 'std-lib'.  )


James
--
James B.

"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, but the illusion
of knowledge."
  - D. Boorstin
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.