Issue #11705 has been updated by Shugo Maeda.

Status changed from Open to Rejected

Mike Pastore wrote:
> Is this intentional and/or expected?

It's intentional and expected.

If class and/or module definitions are explicitly nested, constants of outer classes and/or modules are looked up.
However, if a class or module definition is not nested, only constants in the class or module, its ancestors,
and if the target is a module, `Object` and `Object`'s ancestors are looked up.

You can see module nesting information by `Module.nesting`.

```
module Foo
  module Bar
    p Module.nesting #=> [Foo::Bar, Foo]
    p Qux.hello      #=> "Hello, world!"
  end
end

module Foo::Bar
  p Module.nesting   #=> [Foo::Bar]
  p Qux.hello        #=> NameError, because Foo is not included in Module.nesting
end
```


----------------------------------------
Bug #11705: Namespace resolution in nested modules with short syntax
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11705#change-55652

* Author: Mike Pastore
* Status: Rejected
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* ruby -v: 
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
Given the following definition:

~~~
module Foo
  class Qux
    def self.hello
      'Hello, world!'
    end
  end
end
~~~

Namespace resolution at a later time works differently when you have nested modules, e.g.

~~~
module Foo
  module Bar
    # Can't find Foo::Bar::Qux, so "goes up" to find Foo::Qux.
    p Qux.hello # < "Hello, world!"
  end
end
~~~

vs. the short syntax, e.g. 

~~~
module Foo::Bar
  # Can't find Foo::Bar::Qux, but doesn't "go up" to find Foo::Qux.
  p Qux.hello # < in `<module:Bar>': uninitialized constant Foo::Bar::Qux (NameError)
end
~~~

Is this intentional and/or expected?



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/