Ruby Namespaces / Modules

Ruby
#1

If I’m in the middle of module A::b::C, and I want to reference a class
from A::B or from A::b::D, do I need to do ::a::b::Classname (or
::a::b::D::Classname)?

It seems a bit repititous to me. A module shouldn’t need to know it’s
ancestors all the way up - just what it needs to use. Having to keep
track couples modules to a tree and obstructs refactoring.

So, what say the veteran Rubyists?

#2

Quoting [email protected]:

If I’m in the middle of module A::b::C, and I want to reference a
class from A::B or from A::b::D, do I need to
do ::a::b::Classname (or ::a::b::D::Classname)?

It seems a bit repititous to me. A module shouldn’t need to know
it’s ancestors all the way up - just what it needs to use.
Having to keep track couples modules to a tree and obstructs
refactoring.

So, what say the veteran Rubyists?

Try it!

module A
module B
class Foo
end
module D
class Bar
end
end
end
module C
p B::Foo
p B::D::Bar
end
end

-mental

#3

[email protected] writes:

   end
 end

end
module C
p B::Foo
p B::D::Bar
end
end

It’s also worth pointing out that:

class A::b::Foo
p C
end

is different to:

module A
module B
class Foo
p C
end
end
end

The latter may reference A::b::C or A::C, whereas the former cannot.

#4

The latter may reference A::b::C or A::C, whereas the former cannot.

Intersting… why is that?

#5

[email protected] writes:

The latter may reference A::b::C or A::C, whereas the former cannot.

Intersting… why is that?

Doing “module X::Y::Z” (or “class X::Y::Z”) will bring only X::Y::Z::*
constants into scope. Constants from outer modules (X::Y::, X::)
aren’t brought in. Thus, to get all the nested namespaces in scope,
you need to open each one explicitly.

It’s been debated:

http://rubyurl.com/1NH
http://rubyurl.com/0KZ