From Wikibooks' Ruby Programming/Overview:
When I said that every Ruby object has a class, I lied. The truth is, every object has two classes: a “regular” class and a singleton class. An object’s singleton class is a nameless class whose only instance is that object. Every object has its very own singleton class, created automatically along with the object. Singleton classes inherit from their object’s regular class and are initially empty, but you can open them up and add methods to them, which can then be called on the lone object belonging to them. This is Ruby’s secret trick to avoid “class methods” and keep its type system simple and elegant
The above passage says that Ruby's secret trick to avoid class methods. I don't understand what the author means here. Where is Ruby stopping us to avoid class methods? for an example, look at the example shown below
class Raj
def self.hi
puts 'Hi'
end
def hello
puts 'hello'
end
end
object=Raj.new
object.hello
Raj.hi
As you can see in the preceding example, the class methods can still be created.
yes?
I understand that there are no true class methods in Ruby; instead, they are methods that are created for the Raj object.
But, in any case, it's allowing me to create the method 'hi,' right?
So, what does it mean when it says, 'This is Ruby's secret trick for avoiding "class methods" and keeping its type system simple and elegant'?
I understand that there are no true class methods in Ruby; instead, they are methods that are created for the Raj object.
That's exactly it, though.
def self.hi
puts 'Hi'
end
This is not a class method or static method. Those don't exist in Ruby. That's the whole point. Your class Raj defines an object of type Class. We can see its type with the #class function.
> Raj.class
=> Class
We can also see its ancestors.
> Raj.class.ancestors
=> [Class, Module, Object, PP::ObjectMixin, Kernel, BasicObject]
Class inherits from Module, since (for the most part) classes can do everything modules can. Module, in turn, inherits from Object, which has some modules of its own mixed in (PP:ObjectMixin is for pretty-printing, and Kernel gets you the nice helpers like puts) and eventually inherits from the root class BasicObject.
But this isn't the whole story, for Raj has its own class as well: its singleton class. We can see the full story by calling #singleton_class instead of #class.
> Raj.singleton_class.ancestors
=>
[#<Class:Raj>,
#<Class:Object>,
#<Class:BasicObject>,
Class,
Module,
Object,
PP::ObjectMixin,
Kernel,
BasicObject]
Now there's a lot more going on. Raj is an instance of the singleton class of Raj, which inherits from the singleton class of Object, which in turn inherits from the singleton class of BasicObject, which inherits from Class and all of the stuff we saw before.
So when you define a method on the class Raj, you're defining it (as an instance method) on the singleton class #<Class:Raj>. And that class (currently) has one instance: Raj.
By the way, it's also useful to know that the term "singleton class" is a bit of a lie. As you can see, the class is very much not a singleton in general. For instance, the singleton class of Object, called #<Class:Object> above, actually has several instances: Object, Raj, String, and most Ruby classes. Personally, I prefer to call them eigenclasses for that reason, but "singleton class" is the official (and more well-known) term.
The author is talking about the singleton class in this sentence, there is a really nice article to deep dive into ruby singleton class: https://medium.com/#leo_hetsch/demystifying-singleton-classes-in-ruby-caf3fa4c9d91
Here is a nice example extracted from this article:
class Vehicle
def initialize(kms)
#kms = kms
end
def drive
puts "let's go!"
end
end
car = Vehicle.new(1000)
bus = Vehicle.new(3000)
def car.drive
print "I'm driving a car! "
super
end
car.drive # "I'm driving a car! let's go!"
bus.drive # "let's go!"
As you can see, here the #drive method has been overridden but only for the car object, the bus object is still using the #drive method defined in the Vehicle class.
This new method is defined on the singleton class (or shadow class) of the object, this is allowing you to define new methods on the fly on an object without polluting all the objects of this class.
This means that Ruby doesn't implement class methods.
Indeed, the Ruby OBJECT Model, allows you to "emulate" the definition of class methods by defining instance methods on the Eigenclass:
class Greeting
def self.hello
'hello world!'
end
def self.eigenclass
class << self
self
end
end
end
Greeting.eigenclass # => #<Class:Greeting>
Greeting.eigenclass.name # => nil
Greeting.singleton_methods # => [:hello, :eigenclass]
Greeting.eigenclass.instance_methods(false) # => [:hello, :eigenclass]
First, we define a Greeting.eigenclass method. This method returns self in the context of the eigenclass — by using the class << self ... end syntax. In this case, self contains an unnamed instance of the class Class (a.k.a an anonymous class). This anonymous class keeps track of the class to which it is attached — the Greeting class in our case.
Then, we can see that the singleton methods of the Greeting class are the instance methods of the Greeting eigenclass.
Feel free to have a look to this very detailed article to learn more about this concept.
To illustrate #Sébastien P.'s answer:
dice = [1,2,3,4,5,6] #an ordinary array instance
def dice.throw #now it has an extra
sample
end
p dice.throw #=>3
Related
I'm near the finish of the Ruby track in Code Academy, and I'm curious about a peculiar thing: I was under the impression that a class is a repository of constants, methods, etc... and that in order to access most of them, you would first need to create an instance of that class or in some cases the methods of themselves can be invoked (as in they are all technically part of the global object). And then I saw something like this:
#Worked
Time.now
I understood as this as the method [now] of instance of class [Time] being invoked. I then tried to invoke the method on its own:
#Failed
now
and that failed, and I assumed that while a method can be created in the general scope [as part of the global object], if it relies on initialized variables of "parent" class, it cannot be called on its own, because it would not know which object to search for those initialized variables. Following that I created a test class:
class Clock
def initialize
#hours = 1
#minutes = 30
end
def showTime
puts "The time is: #{#hours}:#{#minutes}"
end
end
#this worked
watch = Clock.new
watch.showTime
#this failed
showTime
I then just created a basic method (assuming it's in the global level)
def mymethod
puts "The mighty METHOD!"
end
#Works
mymethod
and calling this method the way I did, without referencing the global object worked. So... the questions I have are as follows:
How can [Time.now] be called in this fashion? Shouldn't there be an instance of Time first created?
Why can't I call the method [now] on its own? Am I right that it relies on resources that it cannot find when called this way?
Why could I not call the method showTime on its own? But if I define any method on the "global" level I can access it without referencing the global object
First of all, your intuition is correct.
Every methods must be an instance method of some receiver.
Global methods are defined as private instance methods on Object class and hence seem to be globally available. Why? From any context Object is always in the class hierarchy of self and hence private methods on Object are always callable without receiver.
def fuuuuuuuuuuun
end
Object.private_methods.include?(:fuuuuuuuuuuun)
# => true
Class methods are defined as instance methods on the "singleton class" of their class instance. Every object in Ruby has two classes, a "singleton class" with instance methods just for that one single object and a "normal class" with method for all objects of that class. Classes are no different, they are objects of the Class class and may have singleton methods.
class A
class << self # the singleton class
def example
end
end
end
A.singleton_class.instance_methods.include?(:example)
# => true
Alternative ways of defining class methods are
class A
def self.example
end
end
# or
def A.example
end
Fun fact, you can define singleton methods on any object (not just on class objects) using the same syntax def (receiver).(method name) as follows
str = "hello"
def str.square_size
size * size
end
str.square_size
# => 25
"any other string".square_size
# => raises NoMethodError
Some programming language history — Singleton classes are taken from the Smalltalk language where they are called "metaclasses". Basically all object-oriented features in Ruby (as well as the functional-style enumerators on Enumerable) are taken from the Smalltalk language. Smalltalk was an early class-based object-oriented language created in the 70ies. It was also the language that invented graphical user interfaces like overlapping windows and menus et cetera. If you love Ruby maybe also take a look at Smalltalk, you might fall in love yet again.
This is known as a class method. If CodeAcademy didn't cover it, that's a shame. Here's some examples:
# basic way
class Foo
def self.bar; :ok; end
end
Foo.bar # => :ok
# alternate syntax
class Foo
class << self
def bar; :ok; end
end
end
# alternate syntax, if Foo class already exists
def Foo.bar; :ok; end
# alternate approach if Foo class already exists
Foo.class_exec do
def bar; :ok; end
end
# to define a class method on an anonymous 'class' for a single instance
# you won't need to use this often
Foo.new.singleton_class.class_exec do
def bar; :ok; end
end
# to define a class method on an instance's actual class
Foo.new.class.class_exec do
def bar; :ok; end
end
Another way to get class methods is to extend a module.
module FooMethods
def bar; :ok; end
end
module Foo
extend FooMethods
end
Foo.bar # => :ok
Note that with Modules, the methods are always defined as instance methods. This way they can be either extended into class scope or included into instance scope. Modules can also have class methods, using the exact same syntax / examples as shown above with classes. However there's not such as easy to load a module's class methods via include or extend.
How can [Time.now] be called in this fashion? Shouldn't there be an
instance of Time first created?
The Time.now method is a class method, not an instance method and therefore can be called directly on the Time class rather than an instance of it Time.new
Class methods are defined on the class themselves using the self keyword:
class Time
def self.now
# code
end
end
Time.now # works
Why can't I call the method [now] on its own? Am I right that it
relies on resources that it cannot find when called this way?
When you call a method "on its own" you're actually implicitly calling it on self:
self.now
The above is the same as just doing:
now
Why could I not call the method showTime on its own? But if I define
any method on the "global" level I can access it without referencing
the global object
You defined the showTime method on a specific class so you have to send that method to that class. When you define a method in the "global" scope you're implicitly defining it on self and the subsequent call to mymethod is actually self.mymethod so it will work.
Time.now is a class method.
To define a class method, you need to define the method with self. : def self.method_name
class Clock
#hours = 1
#minutes = 30
def self.showTime
puts "The time is: #{#hours}:#{#minutes}"
end
end
Clock.showTime
#=> The time is: 1:30
If you want to call now on its own, you can do so inside Time class :
class Time
puts now
#=> 2017-01-19 22:17:29 +0100
end
In this code:
class Dog
def self.bark
print "woof"
end
end
class Little_dog < Dog
end
Little_dog.bark
the method is inherited from a generalised class that references self. But the next patch of code:
class Dog
def Dog.bark
print "woof"
end
end
class Little_dog < Dog
end
Little_dog.bark
also works. I was expecting it to give me an error, but it didn't.
How does self refer to the class method under class inheritance? Why does the little_dog class have a class method bark in the second example when I only defined it as a class method of Dog?
self is widely used in Ruby Metaprogramming.
From Metaprogramming Ruby book:
Every line of Ruby code is executed inside an object—the so–called
current object. The current object is also known as self, because
you can access it with the self keyword.
Only one object can take the role of self at a given time, but no
object holds that role for a long time. In particular, when you call a
method, the receiver becomes self. From that moment on, all instance
variables are instance variables of self, and all methods called
without an explicit receiver are called on self. As soon as your code
explicitly calls a method on some other object, that other object
becomes self.
So, in code:
class Dog
# self represents the class object i.e: Dog. Which is an instance of Class.
# `bark` will be treated as class method
def self.bark
print "woof"
end
end
can also be written as:
class Dog
# Dog is an instance of Class.
# `bark` will be treated as class method
def Dog.bark
print "woof"
end
end
Inheritance allows a subclass to use features of its parent class. That's why you can access bark method in Little_dog class since it is inherited Dog class:
class Little_dog < Dog
# has `bark` as a class method because of Dog
end
Ruby style guide tip: In Ruby it's considered as a best practice to use CamelCase convention for naming classes and modules.
When you're defining class method it actually doesn't matter if you use
Dog.bark
or
self.bark
Both method defines class method which will be inherited by subclasses.
Only difference is when you will be changing name of class Dog to something else, like BigDog - when you use Dog.bark it obviously needs to be changed to BigDog.bark.
When using self method definition, self.bark will still work.
Can anyone explain to me what the meaning of adding self to the method definition is? Is it similar to the this keyword in java?
Contrary to other languages, Ruby has no class methods, but it has singleton methods attached to a particular object.
cat = String.new("cat")
def cat.speak
'miaow'
end
cat.speak #=> "miaow"
cat.singleton_methods #=> ["speak"]
def cat.speak creates a singleton method attached to the object cat.
When you write class A, it is equivalent to A = Class.new :
A = Class.new
def A.speak
"I'm class A"
end
A.speak #=> "I'm class A"
A.singleton_methods #=> ["speak"]
def A.speak creates a singleton method attached to the object A. We call it a class method of class A.
When you write
class A
def self.c_method
'in A#c_method'
end
end
you create an instance of Class(*). Inside the class definition, Ruby sets self to this new instance of Class, which has been assigned to the constant A. Thus def self.c_method is equivalent to def cat.speak, that is to say you define a singleton method attached to the object self, which is currently the class A.
Now the class A has two singleton methods, that we commonly call class methods.
A.singleton_methods
=> ["c_method", "speak"]
(*) technically, in this case where A has already been created by A = Class.new, class A reopens the existing class. That's why we have two singleton methods at the end. But in the usual case where it is the first definition of a class, it means Class.new.
In ruby self is somewhat similar to this in java, but when it comes to classes its more like the keyword static in java. A short example:
class A
# class method
def self.c_method
true
end
# instance method
def i_method
true
end
end
A.c_method #=> true
A.i_method #=> failure
A.new.i_method #=> true
A.new.c_method #=> failure
Update: Difference between static methods in java and class methods in ruby
Static methods in Java have two distinct features that makes them different from instance methods: a) they are static, b) they are not associated with an instance. (IOW: they really aren't like methods at all, they are just procedures.) In Ruby, all methods are dynamic, and all methods are associated with an instance. In fact, unlike Java where there are three different kinds of "methods" (instance methods, static methods and constructors), there is only one kind of method in Ruby: instance methods. So, no: static methods in Java are completely unlike methods in Ruby. – Jörg W Mittag 1 hour ago
When declaring a method, the self of the declaration is the declaring class/module, so effectively you are defining a class method. For the client, this works similar to a static method in java. The client would call the method on the class instead of an instance: MyClass.method
Here you can find some more details on class and instance methods.
EDIT: While the self keyword is akin to the this keyword in java, the effects of using self for class method declaration are similar to the effect of using the static keyword in java. The similarity is that static methods in java, like class methods in ruby are accessed using the class object iself instead of an instance of the class.
Please note that static does not stand for the opposite of dynamic. The choice of the name for this keyword is questionable (probably inherited from C) and rather should have been called perClass or similar to better reflect the meaning. The technical meaning is that all static members exist only once for each classloader.
How can I get the class name of an instance of BasicObject in Ruby? For example, say I have this:
class MyObjectSystem < BasicObject
end
puts MyObjectSystem.new.class
How can I make this code succeed?
EDIT: I've found that Object's instance method class is defined as return rb_class_real(CLASS_OF(obj));. Any way to use this from Ruby?
I spent some time playing around with irb and came up with this:
class BasicObject
def class
klass = class << self; self; end # get the object's singleton class
klass.superclass # the superclass of an object's singleton class is that object's class
end
end
That will give any object that inherits from BasicObject a #class method that you can call.
Edit
Further explanation as requested in the comments:
Say you have object obj that is an instance of class Foo. obj gets its instance methods from those that are defined within the class Foo, in addition to the methods defined in Foo's parent class and so on up the inheritance chain. Ruby lets you define methods directly on an object that are only accessible to that particular object like this
obj = Foo.new
def obj.hello
puts "hello"
end
obj.hello #=> hello
other_obj = Foo.new
other_obj.hello #=> Method missing error
The reason you can do this is because every object has something called a singleton class (or sometimes call an eigenclass) that you are actually defining the method on. This singleton class actually exists in the inheritance chain of the object directly beneath the object's actual class. That makes the object's actual class, Foo in this example, the superclass of the object's singleton class.
The class << self line you see in the answer is a special syntax for entering the scope of an object's singleton class. So in the example above, you could also define a method in an object's singleton class like this
class << obj
def goodbye
puts "goodbye"
end
end
obj.goodbye #=> goodbye
So the line class << self; self; end is opening the object's singleton class (whatever object is currently self) and then returning self (self has now become the singleton class), which can then be assigned to a variable to do what you wish with.
I would recommend reading Metaprogramming Ruby if you want a better explanation of all this. It definitely gives you a much better understanding of the Ruby object model as a whole.
I have to leave in a few minutes so I can't test it myself, but it seems like you could make a separate module that uses ffi to call rb_class_real from libruby. If I had more time I would test it first, but nobody else has answered yet and I don't want you leave you totally out in the cold.
Based on Jeff Smith's answer, you can do this without modifying BasicObject:
class << object; self; end.superclass
where object is an instance of an object whose class you want, i.e.,
irb(main):001:0> object = BasicObject.new
(Object doesn't support #inspect)
=>
irb(main):002:0> class << object; self; end.superclass
=> BasicObject
In Ruby, we could use super within singleton method to call the corresponding super class's singleton method, like the following code shows.
class Base
def self.class_method
puts "Base class method"
end
end
class Derived < Base
def self.class_method
puts "Derived class method"
super
end
end
Derived.class_method
# Derived class method
# Base class method
However, I don't seem quite get how that call to super within Derived.class_method could reach Base.class_method. I'd assume that class_method is defined on their metaclass, does that mean their metaclass has parent/child relationship? (I can't quite confirm that by experiments)
Update: I'm asking this question because I remembered seeing somewhere there's some kind of relationship bettwen base and derived class' metaclass (but I can't find it any more). In addition to know how actually super works, I'd also like to confirm whether the two metaclasses are totally separate or not.
There are four class objects in play here:
<Class>---class---><Class>
Base #Base
^ ^
| |
| |
super super
| |
| |
<Class> <Class>
Derived---class--->#Derived
Nomenclature:
<...> is the class of each object.
The name of the class is on the second line.
If the name starts with #, it's the eigenclass (aka singleton class).
super points to a class's superclass
class points to the class's class.
When you call Derived.class_method, Ruby follows the "right one and then up" rule: First go to the object's class, then follow the superclass chain up, stopping when the method is found:
The receiver of the "class_method" call is Derived. So follow the chain right to Derived's class object, which is its eigenclass (#Derived).
Derived does not define the method, so Ruby follows the chain up the chain to #Derived's superclass, which is #Base.
The method is found there, so Ruby dispatches the message to #Base.class_method
You don't think I knew all this stuff off the top of my head, did you? Here's where my brain got all this meta juju: Metaprogramming Ruby.
Part 2. How to make an "eigenclass" (aka "singleton class") come out of hiding
class Object
def eigenclass
class << self
self
end
end
end
This method will return the eigenclass of any object. Now, what about classes? Those are objects, too.
p Derived.eigenclass # => #<Class:Derived>
p Derived.eigenclass.superclass # => #<Class:Base>
p Base.eigenclass # => #<Class:Base>
Note: Above is from Ruby1.9. When run under Ruby 1.8, you get a surprise:
p Derived.eigenclass.superclass # => #<Class:Class>
To clarify and correct what i wrote in the comments regarding the way Ruby hides/exposes eigenclasses, here is the situation:
Ruby 1.8:
(1) The Object#class method always returns the first real (non eigenclass or iclass) superclass of the actual class of an object.
e.g
o = Object.new
class << o; end
o.class #=> returns Object, even though the _actual_ class is the eigenclass of o
In other words, the Object#class method will never return an eigenclass, it passes over them
and instead returns the first 'real' class it finds in the inheritance hierarchy.
(2) The Class#superclass method has two cases. If the receiver is not an eigenclass then it simply returns the superclass. However, if the receiver is an eigenclass then this method returns the actual (i.e not necessarily real) class of the receiver.
# case where receiver is a normal class (i.e not an eigenclass)
Module.superclass #=> Object (behaves as expected)
# case where receiver is an eigenclass
class << Module; superclass; end #=> returns Class, this is NOT the superclass
From above, Class#superclass behaves as expected in the case of a normal class, but for the eigenclass example it states the superclass of the eigenclass of Module is Class which is not true. From this diagram http://banisterfiend.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/the-secret-life-of-singletons/ we know that the superclass of the eigenclass of Module is actually the eigenclass of Object. I am unsure why Ruby 1.8 has this strange behaviour.
Ruby 1.9:
(1) The Object#class method behaves identically to the 1.8 version.
(2) The Class#superclass method no longer has two cases, it now treats eigenclasses the same way it treats normal classes and returns the actual superclass as expected.
e.g
class << Module; superclass; end #=> #<Class:Object>
This diagram explains the relationship: http://banisterfiend.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/a-complete-ruby-class-diagram/
Also, here are some other posts that explain more the intricacies of eigenclasses:
http://www.klankboomklang.com/2007/10/05/the-metaclass/
http://www.klankboomklang.com/2007/09/21/the-singleton-class/
And here's a fairly hard-going one that explains more than you'd probably like to know:
http://banisterfiend.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/the-secret-life-of-singletons/