Is self the same in both of these cases?
class Person
def who_am_i?
puts self # self?
end
end
ted = Person.new
def ted.singleton_who_am_i?
puts self # self?
end
ted.who_am_i?
ted.singleton_who_am_i?
Yes, it appears so:
class Person
def who_am_i?
puts self.to_yaml
end
end
ted = Person.new
def ted.singleton_who_am_i?
puts self.to_yaml
end
ted.who_am_i?
--- !ruby/object:Person {}
ted.singleton_who_am_i?
--- !ruby/object:Person {}
class Foo
def bar
p self
end
end
class << Foo
def bar
p self
end
end
Foo.bar #Foo (the class itself)
Foo.new.bar #<Foo:0x10acc70> (a Foo class object)
When the context is in a object, self is the object.
When the context is in the class, self is the class.
Also I do know if "singleton" is a good word for Ruby because in Ruby, even a class is an object, and "singleton" simply adds method to an existing object.
Singleton methods are instance methods only a certain object responds to. Here's how this is implemented:
The object's singleton class is opened;
Ruby defines your singleton method as an instance method of the singleton class.
What is not apparent here is the actual relationship between the actual class and singleton class. One could say it sits between the class and the object.
More precisely, the singleton class inherits from the actual class, and actually is the object's class.
Why doesn't Object#class return the singleton class, you ask? Well, it simply skips over it. Yeah.
Here's an example. Given the following class:
class Person
def instance; self end # self is the Person instance here
end
person = Person.new
If we wanted to define a singleton method for person, we could write this:
class << person
def singleton; self end # What is self in this context?
end
This is roughly equivalent to this:
class SingletonPerson < Person
def singleton; self end # self is the Person instance here too!
end
person = SingletonPerson.new
The main difference is that Ruby knows that SingletonPerson is a singleton class, so when you call person.class you actually get Person and not SingletonPerson.
This effectively hides all this complexity from you, which is a great thing. However, it is also great to understand how things work under the hood. The same logic here applies to class methods, which are really just singleton methods of a Class or Module instance.
Related
How can be described that a method boo defined in Object class becomes instance and class one at the same time in class Foo?
class Foo; end
class Object
def boo
'boo method'
end
end
p Foo.boo # => boo method
p Foo.new.boo # => boo method
Every object is an instance of Object. Thus, every object will respond to boo.
Foo is an object (classes are objects, too), ergo, Foo is an instance of Object (it is an instance of Class, which is a subclass of Module, which is a subclass of Object).
Foo.new is an object (it is an instance of Foo, which is a subclass of Object).
Since both Foo and Foo.new are instances of Object, both respond to boo.
[Note: I am ignoring the existence of BasicObject.]
If you really want to do this, keep in mind that the class context and the instance context are entirely different so instance variables are not equivalent.
module FooMethods
def boo
'boo'
end
end
class Foo
extend FooMethods
include FooMethods
end
This deliberately imports the mixin at both the class level via extend and instance level via include.
Perhaps forwarding the method to self is an option?
require 'forwardable'
class Foo
extend Forwardable
def self.boo
'boo method'
end
def_delegator self, :boo
end
Foo.boo
#=> "boo method"
Foo.new.boo
#=> "boo method"
I am very confused about this. In Programming Ruby book, it says,
"receiver checks for the method definition in its own class"
So class object stores all instance methods. Then why can't I call
instance method from within a class?
For example
Class ExampleClass
def example_method
end
example_method
end
I cannot call example_method inside ExampleClass.
However if I define a method in top level like this:
class ExampleClass
def example_method
end
end
def example_method1
end
example_method1
Then I can call top level method example_method1.
Isn't top level also a class? How come it is different than
a calling instance method from within ExampleClass?
The biggest reason that you cannot call that function in the way that you have written it is that it is, as you say, an instance method.
Try defining it in this way:
class ExampleClass
def self.class_method
puts "I'm a class method"
end
class_method
end
I believe you will find that you have a different result. It's not that it's "Top Level", it's whether or not it's in scope for what you're dealing with. Since you're dealing with a class, a class method would be necessary. If you're dealing with an object (an instantiated class) it's a different "scope".
Those "global" methods are an exception. They are defined as private instance methods of Object. Everything inherits from Object, so these methods are "globally" visible.
p self.class # => Object
p self.private_methods.sort # => [:Array, :Complex, ... :using, :warn] # all (?) from Kernel module
def aaaa
end
p self.private_methods.sort # => [:aaaa, :Array, ... :using, :warn]
The receiver checks for the method definition in its own class. The receiver is ExampleClass. The class of ExampleClass is Class. There is no example_method method in the Class class, ergo, you get a NoMethodError.
I'll try to explain it as follows.
class MyClass
def self.my_method
puts "Me, I'm a class method. Note that self = #{self}"
end
def my_method
puts "Me, I'm an instance method. Note that self = #{self}"
end
# I'm about to invoke :my_method on self. Which one will it be?"
# "That depends on what self is now, of course.
puts "self = #{self}"
# OK. It's MyClass. But wait. I'm just defining the set now.
# Do the methods I defined above even exist yet?
# Does the class exist yet? Let's find out.
print "class methods: "
puts self.methods(false)
print "instance methods: "
puts self.instance_methods(false)
# Cool! Let's try invoking my_method
my_method
# It worked. It was the class method because self = MyClass
# Now let's see if we can create an instance of the class before
# we finish defining the class. Surely we can't.
my_instance = new
puts "my_instance = #{my_instance}"
# We can! Now that's very interesting. Can we invoke the
# instance method on that instance?
my_instance.my_method
# Yes!
end
The following is printed while the class is being defined:
self = MyClass
class methods: my_method
instance methods: my_method
Me, I'm a class method. Note that self = MyClass
my_instance = #<MyClass:0x007fd6119125a0>
Me, I'm an instance method. Note that self = #<MyClass:0x007fd6119125a0>
Now let's confirm the methods can be invoked from outside the class. There should be no surprises here:
MyClass.my_method
#-> Me, I'm a class method. Note that self = MyClass
my_instance = MyClass.new
my_instance.my_method
#-> Me, I'm an instance method. Note that self = #<MyClass:0x007fd61181d668>
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
I'm stuck. I'm trying to dynamically define a class method and I can't wrap my head around the ruby metaclass model. Consider the following class:
class Example
def self.meta; (class << self; self; end); end
def self.class_instance; self; end
end
Example.class_instance.class # => Class
Example.meta.class # => Class
Example.class_instance == Example # => true
Example.class_instance == Example.meta # => false
Obviously both methods return an instance of Class. But these two instances
are not the same. They also have different ancestors:
Example.meta.ancestors # => [Class, Module, Object, Kernel]
Example.class_instance.ancestors # => [Example, Object, Kernel]
What's the point in making a difference between the metaclass and the class instance?
I figured out, that I can send :define_method to the metaclass to dynamically define a method, but if I try to send it to the class instance it won't work. At least I could solve my problem, but I still want to understand why it is working this way.
Update Mar 15, 2010 13:40
Are the following assumptions correct.
If I have an instance method which calls self.instance_eval and defines a method, it will only affect the particular instance of that class.
If I have an instance method which calls self.class.instance_eval (which would be the same as calling class_eval) and defines a method it will affect all instances of that particular class resulting in a new instance method.
If I have a class method which calls instance_eval and defines a method it will result in a new instance method for all instances.
If I have a class method which calls instance_eval on the meta/eigen class and defines a method it will result in a class method.
I think it starts to make sense to me. It would certainly limit your possibilities if self inside an class method would point to the eigen class. If so it would not be possible to define an instance method from inside a class method. Is that correct?
Defining a singleton method dynamically is simple when you use instance_eval:
Example.instance_eval{ def square(n); n*n; end }
Example.square(2) #=> 4
# you can pass instance_eval a string as well.
Example.instance_eval "def multiply(x,y); x*y; end"
Example.multiply(3,9) #=> 27
As for the difference above, you are confusing 2 things:
The meta class defined by you, is what called in Ruby community as singelton class or eigen class. That singleton class is the class that you can add class(singleton) methods to.
As for the class instance you are trying to define using the class_instance method, is nothing but the class itself, to prove it, just try adding an instance method to the class Example and check if the class_instance method defined by you returns the class Example itself by checking the existence of that method:
class Example
def self.meta; (class << self; self; end); end
def self.class_instance; self; end
def hey; puts hey; end
end
Example.class_instance.instance_methods(false) #=> ['hey']
Anyway to sum it for you, when you want to add class methods, just add them to that meta class. As for the class_instance method is useless, just remove it.
Anyway I suggest you read this post to grasp some concepts of Ruby reflection system.
UPDATE
I suggest you read this nice post: Fun with Ruby's instance_eval and class_eval,
Unfortunately class_eval and instance_eval are confusing because they somehow work against their naming!
Use ClassName.instance_eval to define class methods.
Use ClassName.class_eval to define instance methods.
Now answering your assumptions:
If I have an instance method which
calls self.instance_eval and defines a
method, it will only affect the
particular instance of that class.
yes:
class Foo
def assumption1()
self.instance_eval("def test_assumption_1; puts 'works'; end")
end
end
f1 = Foo.new
f1.assumption1
f1.methods(false) #=> ["test_assumption_1"]
f2 = Foo.new.methods(false) #=> []
If I have an instance method which
calls self.class.instance_eval (which
would be the same as calling
class_eval) and defines a method it
will affect all instances of that
particular class resulting in a new
instance method.
no instance_eval in that context will define singleton methods(not instance ones) on the class itself:
class Foo
def assumption2()
self.class.instance_eval("def test_assumption_2; puts 'works'; end")
end
end
f3 = Foo.new
f3.assumption2
f3.methods(false) #=> []
Foo.singleton_methods(false) #=> ["test_assumption_2"]
For that to work replace instance_eval with class_eval above.
If I have a class method which calls
instance_eval and defines a method it
will result in a new instance method
for all instances.
Nope:
class Foo
instance_eval do
def assumption3()
puts 'works'
end
end
end
Foo.instance_methods(false) #=> []
Foo.singleton_methods(false) #=> ["assumption_3"]
That will make singleton methods, not instance methods. For that to work replace instance_eval with class_eval above.
If I have a class method which calls
instance_eval on the meta/eigen class
and defines a method it will result in
a class method.
well no, that will make so sophisticated stuff, as it will add singleton method to the singleton class, I don't think that will have any practical use.
If you define a method on a class, it can be invoked on its objects. It is an instance method.
class Example
end
Example.send :define_method, :foo do
puts "foo"
end
Example.new.foo
#=> "foo"
If you define a method on a metaclass, it can be invoked on the class. This is similar to the concept of a class method or static method in other languages.
class Example
def self.metaclass
class << self
self
end
end
end
Example.metaclass.send :define_method, :bar do
puts "bar"
end
Example.bar
#=> "bar"
The reason that metaclasses exist is because you can do this in Ruby:
str = "hello"
class << str
def output
puts self
end
end
str.output
#=> "hello"
"hi".output
# NoMethodError
As you can see, we defined a method that is only available to one instance of a String. The thing that we defined this method on is called the metaclass. In the method lookup chain, the metaclass is accessed first before searching the object's class.
If we replace the object of type String with an object of type Class, you can imagine why this means we're only defining a method on a specific class, not on all classes.
The differences between the current context and self are subtle, you can read more if you're interested.
What does class << self do in Ruby?
First, the class << foo syntax opens up foo's singleton class (eigenclass). This allows you to specialise the behaviour of methods called on that specific object.
a = 'foo'
class << a
def inspect
'"bar"'
end
end
a.inspect # => "bar"
a = 'foo' # new object, new singleton class
a.inspect # => "foo"
Now, to answer the question: class << self opens up self's singleton class, so that methods can be redefined for the current self object (which inside a class or module body is the class or module itself). Usually, this is used to define class/module ("static") methods:
class String
class << self
def value_of obj
obj.to_s
end
end
end
String.value_of 42 # => "42"
This can also be written as a shorthand:
class String
def self.value_of obj
obj.to_s
end
end
Or even shorter:
def String.value_of obj
obj.to_s
end
When inside a function definition, self refers to the object the function is being called with. In this case, class << self opens the singleton class for that object; one use of that is to implement a poor man's state machine:
class StateMachineExample
def process obj
process_hook obj
end
private
def process_state_1 obj
# ...
class << self
alias process_hook process_state_2
end
end
def process_state_2 obj
# ...
class << self
alias process_hook process_state_1
end
end
# Set up initial state
alias process_hook process_state_1
end
So, in the example above, each instance of StateMachineExample has process_hook aliased to process_state_1, but note how in the latter, it can redefine process_hook (for self only, not affecting other StateMachineExample instances) to process_state_2. So, each time a caller calls the process method (which calls the redefinable process_hook), the behaviour changes depending on what state it's in.
I found a super simple explanation about class << self , Eigenclass and different type of methods.
In Ruby, there are three types of methods that can be applied to a class:
Instance methods
Singleton methods
Class methods
Instance methods and class methods are almost similar to their homonymous in other programming languages.
class Foo
def an_instance_method
puts "I am an instance method"
end
def self.a_class_method
puts "I am a class method"
end
end
foo = Foo.new
def foo.a_singleton_method
puts "I am a singletone method"
end
Another way of accessing an Eigenclass(which includes singleton methods) is with the following syntax (class <<):
foo = Foo.new
class << foo
def a_singleton_method
puts "I am a singleton method"
end
end
now you can define a singleton method for self which is the class Foo itself in this context:
class Foo
class << self
def a_singleton_and_class_method
puts "I am a singleton method for self and a class method for Foo"
end
end
end
Usually, instance methods are global methods. That means they are available in all instances of the class on which they were defined. In contrast, a singleton method is implemented on a single object.
Ruby stores methods in classes and all methods must be associated with a class. The object on which a singleton method is defined is not a class (it is an instance of a class). If only classes can store methods, how can an object store a singleton method? When a singleton method is created, Ruby automatically creates an anonymous class to store that method. These anonymous classes are called metaclasses, also known as singleton classes or eigenclasses. The singleton method is associated with the metaclass which, in turn, is associated with the object on which the singleton method was defined.
If multiple singleton methods are defined within a single object, they are all stored in the same metaclass.
class Zen
end
z1 = Zen.new
z2 = Zen.new
class << z1
def say_hello
puts "Hello!"
end
end
z1.say_hello # Output: Hello!
z2.say_hello # Output: NoMethodError: undefined method `say_hello'…
In the above example, class << z1 changes the current self to point to the metaclass of the z1 object; then, it defines the say_hello method within the metaclass.
Classes are also objects (instances of the built-in class called Class). Class methods are nothing more than singleton methods associated with a class object.
class Zabuton
class << self
def stuff
puts "Stuffing zabuton…"
end
end
end
All objects may have metaclasses. That means classes can also have metaclasses. In the above example, class << self modifies self so it points to the metaclass of the Zabuton class. When a method is defined without an explicit receiver (the class/object on which the method will be defined), it is implicitly defined within the current scope, that is, the current value of self. Hence, the stuff method is defined within the metaclass of the Zabuton class. The above example is just another way to define a class method. IMHO, it's better to use the def self.my_new_clas_method syntax to define class methods, as it makes the code easier to understand. The above example was included so we understand what's happening when we come across the class << self syntax.
Additional info can be found at this post about Ruby Classes.
What class << thing does:
class Hi
self #=> Hi
class << self #same as 'class << Hi'
self #=> #<Class:Hi>
self == Hi.singleton_class #=> true
end
end
[it makes self == thing.singleton_class in the context of its block].
What is thing.singleton_class?
hi = String.new
def hi.a
end
hi.class.instance_methods.include? :a #=> false
hi.singleton_class.instance_methods.include? :a #=> true
hi object inherits its #methods from its #singleton_class.instance_methods and then from its #class.instance_methods.
Here we gave hi's singleton class instance method :a. It could have been done with class << hi instead.
hi's #singleton_class has all instance methods hi's #class has, and possibly some more (:a here).
[instance methods of thing's #class and #singleton_class can be applied directly to thing. when ruby sees thing.a, it first looks for :a method definition in thing.singleton_class.instance_methods and then in thing.class.instance_methods]
By the way - they call object's singleton class == metaclass == eigenclass.
А singleton method is a method that is defined only for a single object.
Example:
class SomeClass
class << self
def test
end
end
end
test_obj = SomeClass.new
def test_obj.test_2
end
class << test_obj
def test_3
end
end
puts "Singleton's methods of SomeClass"
puts SomeClass.singleton_methods
puts '------------------------------------------'
puts "Singleton's methods of test_obj"
puts test_obj.singleton_methods
Singleton's methods of SomeClass
test
Singleton's methods of test_obj
test_2
test_3
In fact if you write any C extensions for your Ruby projects there is really only one way to define a Module method.
rb_define_singleton_method
I know this self business just opens up all kinds of other questions so you could do better by searching each part.
Objects first.
foo = Object.new
Can I make a method for foo?
Sure
def foo.hello
'hello'
end
What do I do with it?
foo.hello
==>"hello"
Just another object.
foo.methods
You get all the Object methods plus your new one.
def foo.self
self
end
foo.self
Just the foo Object.
Try to see what happens if you make foo from other Objects like Class and Module. The examples from all the answers are nice to play with but you have to work with different ideas or concepts to really understand what is going on with the way the code is written. So now you have lots of terms to go look at.
Singleton,
Class,
Module,
self,
Object,
and Eigenclass was brought up but Ruby doesn't name Object Models that way. It's more like Metaclass.
Richard or __why shows you the idea here.
http://viewsourcecode.org/why/hacking/seeingMetaclassesClearly.html
And if the blows you away then try looking up Ruby Object Model in search.
Two videos that I know of on YouTube are Dave Thomas and Peter Cooper. They try to explain that concept too. It took Dave a long time to get it so don't worry.
I'm still working on it too. Why else would I be here?
Thanks for your question.
Also take a look at the standard library. It has a Singleton Module just as an FYI.
This is pretty good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4uiyWA8eFk