Ara.T.Howard / noaa.gov a ñÄrit :
> On Tue, 17 May 2005, Christoph wrote:
> 
>> Ara.T.Howard / noaa.gov schrieb:
>>
>>>>  misunderstood something once again?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> well - sorta ;-)
>>>
>>> i only meant to say that the behaviour is consistent and, although
>>> there is no
>>> regular ruby idiom that makes use of it now, there may well be in the
>>> future.
>>
>>
>> Actually the behavior is not consistent  - assuming the definition
>> ----
>> public # create meta objects
>> def m(height =1)
>>    height.zero? ? self  :   class << self; self end.m(height -1)
>> end
>> ----
>>
>> and the natural inheritance assumption, that the class relation
>>
>> X < Y         # true, implies
>> X.m < Y.m # true
> 
> 
> here we depart.  i don't assume this because X's singleton class is just
> that
> : a singleton (eg. one) class with no relation to that of Y's.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> so the only reason that
> 
>   class C; end
>   class B < C; end
> 
>   class << C
>     def foo; 42; end
>   end
>   class << B
>     def bar; 'forty-two'; end
>   end
> 
> permits
> 
>   B.foo
> 
> is __not__ because B.singleton_class < C.singleton_class.  rather it is
> because the search path for a method is, naturally, up the ancestor list
> hierarchy and, at each step along the way, each class additionally looks
> 'sideways' into it's singleton_class (it's pocket) but not into the
> singleton_class of any other classes since, by definition, those classes
> belong only to the object that created them - it would be like looking into
> someone else's pockets ;-)
> 

http://www.ruby-talk.org/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/140562

If you really want ruby2 works the way you described it, I advice you to
urgently post an RCR for it.

-- 
Lionel Thiry

Personal website: http://users.skynet.be/lthiry/