Issue #5067 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer.


But that was the main point of adding the documentation!  And how can it be "half-baked"? What other solution is there? 

The documentation states that it is "if" you need to reference constant normally from within a basic object, then the solution is #cont_missing. Maybe it needs to be worded better, but that's the ONLY solution there is.

Maybe you do not write DSL often, I work with them very often. Having known this upfront could have saved me many hours and days of headache. And saved me from reporting it as a bug. It sure seems like bug at first. But you and others have explained to me why it is not a bug. It only seems right to explain that in the documentation and to give the ONLY work around if it is needed.

----------------------------------------
Bug #5067: BasicObject's constant lookup documentation
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5067

Author: Shyouhei Urabe
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: DOC
Target version: 
ruby -v: doesn't matter


Take a look at https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/31 .

It's OK for me to merge this request -- no technical difficulties -- but is it a right thing to be documented?


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org