Module#name for anonymous modules

Ruby
1

Observation:

mod = Module.new
mod.name #=> “”

Maybe it would more friendly if Module#name returned nil in this case?
Then one could more easily say:

if mod.name
…
end

T.

2

Hi,

In message “Re: Module#name for anonymous modules”
on Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:08:20 +0900, [email protected] writes:

|Observation:
|
| mod = Module.new
| mod.name #=> “”
|
|Maybe it would more friendly if Module#name returned nil in this case?
|Then one could more easily say:
|
| if mod.name
| …
| end

OK. It will be for 1.9 or later.

						matz.
3

Yukihiro M. wrote:

|Maybe it would more friendly if Module#name returned nil in this case?
|Then one could more easily say:
|
| if mod.name
| …
| end

OK. It will be for 1.9 or later.

Hmm, I think it may be too indirect. You aren’t really checking whether
the module has a name or not, but rather if it’s anonymous. Maybe an
#anonymous? method for both Module and Class, in addition to #name being
nil?

Cheers,
Daniel

4

Dimitri A. wrote:

On 6/22/06, Daniel S. [email protected] wrote:

Hmm, I think it may be too indirect. You aren’t really checking whether
the module has a name or not, but rather if it’s anonymous.

Isn’t that the very definition of anonymous? “without a name”

Good point :slight_smile:

I still think it’s less mysterious to users if they could check the
anonymity of a module/class with an #anonymous? method, rather than
checking whether the name is nil.

Cheers,
Daniel

5

On 6/22/06, Daniel S. [email protected] wrote:

Hmm, I think it may be too indirect. You aren’t really checking whether
the module has a name or not, but rather if it’s anonymous.

Isn’t that the very definition of anonymous? “without a name”

:slight_smile:

  • Dimitri