Super super?


#1

Hello, I’m looking for informations about “super”.

I have 3 classes : grandfather, father, and son.
And they all have a method named “say_hello”.

class Grand_father
  def say_hello
    puts "Grand Father : Hello"
  end
end

class Father < Grand_father
  def say_hello
    super
    puts "Father : Hello"
  end
end

class Son < Father
  def say_hello
    super
    puts "Son : Hello"
  end
end

s = Son.new
s.say_hello
Grand Father : Hello
Father : Hello
Son : Hello

But now, I would that Son didn’t call Father, but directly Grand_father.

s.say_hello
Grand Father : Hello
Son : Hello

How could I do that ?


#2

Marc-antoine Kruzik wrote:

But now, I would that Son didn’t call Father, but directly Grand_father.

s.say_hello
Grand Father : Hello
Son : Hello

How could I do that ?

I am taking a break at work so I can’t test it, but could you please
try:
super.super.say_hello


#3

On 19.05.2009 21:29, Marc-antoine Kruzik wrote:

puts "Grand Father : Hello"

class Son < Father
Father : Hello
Son : Hello

But now, I would that Son didn’t call Father, but directly Grand_father.

s.say_hello
Grand Father : Hello
Son : Hello

How could I do that ?

You can do

class Son < Father
def say_hello
Grand_father.instance_method(:say_hello).bind(self).call
puts “Son : Hello”
end
end

However, as the weird construction indicates something might be wrong
with this kind of design. If you assume that the method actually had
side effects on the instance’s state and you leave out one class in the
chain you likely end up with an instance in an inconsistent state. In
that case the design probably needs some work.

Btw, if Father does not define say_hello super will automatically call
Grand_father’s method.

Kind regards

robert


#4

On 19.05.2009 22:36, Ilan B. wrote:

I am taking a break at work so I can’t test it, but could you please
try:
super.super.say_hello

This won’t work - at least not in the way you intended. :slight_smile:

Kind regards

robert


#5

2009/5/20 F. Senault removed_email_address@domain.invalid:

That being said, you could work in the Father class like this to obtain
the wanted result :

class Father < Grand_father
def say_hello
super
puts “Father : Hello” unless self.is_a? Son
end
end

Frankly, I find that even worse than my hack. The reason: now Father
needs to know something about a sub class so we have a circular
dependency. That’s usually a bad thing to have. Consider, all these
classes are in different files and someone only needs Father and
Grand_father: code will break in Father because Son is undefined.
It’s ok if Son knows something about his parents but not otherwise.

Kind regards

robert


#6

Le 19 mai à 21:29, Marc-antoine Kruzik a écrit :

Hello, I’m looking for informations about “super”.
/…/
I have 3 classes : grandfather, father, and son.
And they all have a method named “say_hello”.
But now, I would that Son didn’t call Father, but directly Grand_father.

s.say_hello
Grand Father : Hello
Son : Hello

How could I do that ?

As others said, refactor, there’s a problem with you inheritance logic.

That being said, you could work in the Father class like this to obtain
the wanted result :

class Father < Grand_father
def say_hello
super
puts “Father : Hello” unless self.is_a? Son
end
end

Fred


#7

class Object
def super!(n,args)
method=caller[0][%r/.
?`(.*?)’/,1].to_sym
klass=self.class.ancestors[n]
klass.instance_method(method).bind(self).call(*args)
end
end

class Grand_father
def say_hello
puts “Grand Father : Hello”
end
end

class Father < Grand_father
def say_hello
super
puts “Father : Hello”
end
end

class Son < Father
def say_hello
super! 2
puts “Son : Hello”
end
end

s = Son.new
s.say_hello

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Marc-antoine Kruzik


#8

Le 20 mai à 10:51, Robert K. a écrit :

Frankly, I find that even worse than my hack.

Of course… :slight_smile:

Fred


#9

2009/5/20 Marc-antoine Kruzik removed_email_address@domain.invalid

Too bad it doesn’t work. But it was pretty logical. :slight_smile:

I don’t think it was logical, but I guess, that’s a matter of taste and
expectation of what ‘super’ does.
And still: KDr2’s solution is bad software design.

Regards
Nicolai


#10

Ilan B. wrote:

I am taking a break at work so I can’t test it, but could you please
try:
super.super.say_hello

Too bad it doesn’t work. But it was pretty logical. :slight_smile:

@ KDr2

That is exactly what I needed ! :smiley:
Thank you very much.


#11

Robert K. wrote:

class Son < Father
def say_hello
Grand_father.instance_method(:say_hello).bind(self).call
puts “Son : Hello”
end
end

Ahh… cool! Thanks for the bind() solution, I am aware of it but it
always falls to the back of my head… I blame either my age, marriage,
or kids on this one…

ilan


#12

Depending on your purpose, it may make sense to allow the caller to
specify which class to invoke the method in. Â (This won’t frequently
be the case, but since you’re specifically looking to invoke your
Grandfather’s method, it might apply here.)

--------8<-------------------------

def Grandfather
  def say_hello(klass=self.class)
return super unless self.is_a?(klass)
   puts ‘Grandfather: Hello’
  end
end

def Father < Grandfather
def say_hello(klass=self.class)
return super unless self.is_a?(klass)
puts ‘Father: Hello’
end
end

def Son < Father
def say_hello(klass=self.class)
return super(Grandfather) unless self.is_a?(klass)
puts ‘Son: Hello’
end
end

--------8<-------------------------

It’s not a best practice, but it might prove useful enough for your
case.


#13

Pieter V. wrote:

Depending on your purpose, it may make sense to allow the caller to
specify which class to invoke the method in. Â (This won’t frequently
be the case, but since you’re specifically looking to invoke your
Grandfather’s method, it might apply here.)

It’s not a best practice, but it might prove useful enough for your
case.

This was just an example. These methods have sometimes arguments, so I
had to find something else.

Because we found by ourselves two solutions, and yours was one of these.
The other was to use aliases, but it was bad.