I'm reading the Metaprogramming section of Programming Ruby 1.9 and I'm having trouble understanding what's going on internally between class_eval/class_exec vs. instance_eval/instance_exec.
So first of all, my understanding is that def adds a method to the method table of self (the class object):
class A
puts self # => A
def foo; 42; end # added to the method table of self, so becomes an instance method
end
A.new.foo # => 42
And if we use class_eval, we get the same behavior:
A.class_eval do
puts self # => A
def bar; 42; end # same as above
end
A.new.bar # => 42
But somehow in the instance_eval case, things are different:
A.instance_eval do
puts self # => A
def baz; 42; end # added to the method table of an anonymous
# singleton class of self, so becomes a class method
end
puts A.baz # => 42
s = 'string'
s.instance_eval do ... end # same behavior, so now def creates an instance method
So I understand the functional difference between class_eval and instance_eval.
But the contexts inside the class_eval and instance_eval blocks look exactly the same to me -- in particular, self points to the same object, and the local_variables are the same. So what's going on inside the blocks (internally) that's making def act different?
Is there some piece of documentation I could read? The RDoc for instance_eval and class_eval doesn't help. Looking at the source, instance_eval seems to set up a singleton class object whereas class_eval doesn't -- but is this difference visible outside the C code, on the Ruby level?
I think your confusion comes from the fact that def does not depend on the current self, you might think about it as being a "current class" that has it's own rules.
Following your examples:
class A
# defs here go to A
puts self # => A
class << self
#defs here go to A's eigenclass
end
end
A.class_eval do
#defs here go to A
end
A.instance_eval do
#defs here go to A's eigenclass
end
s = "Hello World"
class << s
#defs here go to s's eigenclass
end
Here's the portion of the chapter that talks about the issue and it's pretty clear about the behaviour
class_eval and instance_eval both set
self for the duration of the block.
However, they differ in the way they
set up the environment for method
definition. class_eval sets things up
as if you were in the body of a class
definition, so method definitions will
define instance methods In contrast,
calling instance_eval on a class acts
as if you were working inside the
singleton class of self. Therefore,
any methods you define will become
class methods.
The only thing I think is worth adding is that you can call instance_eval in any object, not just classes, and the behaviour doesn't change but has different consequences.
Some relevant reading:
Ruby: instance_eval and class_eval method definitions
Chapter 4 of this most excelent series
Just to add to #krusty.ar's answer: def and define_method add methods to the current method definition context (I believe that's what it's called, I'm not sure), not to the current self.
It's just that inside of a module, class or singleton class body, those two happen to be the same.
But, for example, in a script body (aka top-level), self is the main object, but the current method definition context is Object.
Related
Seems I am confused between the two methods though I have been using them for a while, I can't understand why the method passengers is not being added to the object in the following code:
class Bus
def number_of_seats
42
end
end
Bus.class_eval do
define_method :number_of_windows do
number_of_seats
end
def fuel_type
:diesel
end
end
Bus.instance_eval do
define_method :destination do
'Paris'
end
def passengers
12
end
end
bus = Bus.new
bus.number_of_windows # => 42
bus.fuel_type # => :diesel
bus.destination # => "Paris"
bus.passengers # => undefined method `passengers' (NoMethodError)
Notes:
Tried instance_eval first, just randomly used class_eval and then it too seemed to work!
My understanding of instance_eval's block: The code in the block is run with self set to the object calling instance_eval.
My understanding of class_eval's block: The code in the block is evaluated as if its placed by opening the class of the object calling it. Hence I am puzzled at the class_eval in the above case! I was expecting class_eval on Bus would mean evaluating the block in the class of Bus Class.
You can refer this awesome article on class and instance_eval as to why passengers is not being added to the object.
TL;DR:
Bus.class_eval will create instance methods and Bus.instance_eval will create class methods.
Now, regarding the behavior of destination(which could be called on instance).....define method when used inside either class_eval or instance_eval is immune to the usual behaviour. Why?.
Because the documentation says so. As per the documentation:
define method - Defines an instance method in the receiver.
Therefore, it does not matter if you use define_method inside class_eval or instance_eval it would always create an instance method.
Source for reference.
Hope this helped :-).
Basically you can't do an instance_eval on a class object when using def. Here's a general way you use instance_eval and class_eval. http://web.stanford.edu/~ouster/cgi-bin/cs142-winter15/classEval.php
I am reading the Module documentation but can't seem to understand their differences and which should be used where.
How is the eval different than exec?
I'm going to answer a bit more than your question by including instance_{eval|exec} in your question.
All variations of {instance|module|class}_{eval|exec} change the current context, i.e. the value for self:
class Array
p self # prints "Array"
43.instance_eval{ p self } # prints "43"
end
Now for the differences. The eval versions accepts a string or a block, while the exec versions only accept a block but allow you to pass parameters to it:
def example(&block)
42.instance_exec("Hello", &block)
end
example{|mess| p mess, self } # Prints "Hello" then "42"
The eval version does not allow to pass parameters. It provides self as the first parameter, although I can't think of a use for this.
Finally, module_{eval|exec} is the same as the corresponding class_{eval|exec}, but they are slightly different from instance_{eval|exec} as they change what is the current opened class (i.e. what will be affected by def) in different ways:
String.instance_eval{ def foo; end }
Integer.class_eval { def bar; end }
String.method_defined?(:foo) # => false
String.singleton_methods.include?(:foo) # => true
Integer.method_defined?(:bar) # => true
So obj.instance_{eval|exec} opens the singleton class of obj, while mod.{class|module}_{eval|exec} opens mod itself.
Of course, instance_{eval|exec} are available on any Ruby object (including modules), while {class|module}_* are only available on Module (and thus Classes)
To answer your last question first, eval (in all its variations) is completely different from exec. exec $command will start a new process to run the command you specify and then exit when that finishes.
class_eval and module_eval have the power to redefine classes and modules -- even those that you yourself did not write. For example, you might use class eval to add a new method that did not exist.
Fixnum.class_eval { def number; self; end }
7.number # returns '7'
class_eval can be used to add instance methods, and instance_eval can be used to add class methods (yes, that part is very confusing). A class method would be something like Thing.foo -- you're literally calling the foo method on the Thing class. An instance method is like the example above, using class_eval I've added a number method to every instance of Fixnum.
Okay, so that's the *_eval class of methods. The exec methods are similar, but they allow you to look inside a class and execute a block of code as though it was defined as a method on that class. Perhaps you have a class that looks like this:
class Foo
##secret = 'secret key'
##protected = 'some secret value'
def protected(key)
if key == ##secret
return ##protected
end
end
end
The class Foo is just a wrapper around some secret value, if you know the correct key. However, you could trick the class into giving you its secrets by executing a block inside the context of the class like so:
Foo.class_exec { ##secret = 'i'm a hacker' }
Foo.protected('i'm a hacker') #returns the value of ##protected because we overwrote ##secret
In general, with a lot of the tools in ruby, you could use any of these to solve a lot of problems. A lot of the time you probably won't even need to unless you want to monkey patch a class some library you use has defined (although that opens up a whole can of worms). Try playing around with them in irb and see which you find easier. I personally don't use the *_exec methods as much as the *_eval methods, but that's a personal preference of mine.
To avoid ambiguity I'm going to call a method that belongs to (owned by) a singleton class a singleton method. The rest are instance methods. Although one might say that a singleton method of an object is an instance method of its singleton class.
tl;dr Use class_eval/module_eval on a class/module to define instance methods, and instance_eval on a class/module to define class methods (or to be more precise, use instance_eval to define singleton methods). Additionally you can use instance_eval to access instance variables.
A terminology is a bit lacking in this case. ruby maintains a stack of class references (cref for short). When you open/reopen a class, the corresponding class reference is pushed to the stack. And the current class refernece affects where def defines methods (to which class/module they're added).
Now, class_eval/module_eval and class_exec/module_exec are aliases.
The *_exec() variants don't accept strings, and allow to pass arguments to the block. Since the *_eval() variants are mainly used I'll focus on them.
class_eval/module_eval changes cref and self to the receiver (Thing in Thing.module_eval(...)):
rb_mod_module_eval() -> specific_eval()
yield_under() (for blocks)
vm_cref_push()
eval_under() (for strings)
vm_cref_push()
instance_eval changes cref to the singleton class of the receiver, and self to the receiver.
Let's see them in action:
class A
p self #=> A
#a = 1
def initialize
#b = 2
end
end
p A.instance_variables #=> [:#a]
p A.new.instance_variables #=> [:#b]
#a on a class level adds an instance variable to the class A as an object. I'm adding it here for completeness. But that's not how you add a class variable.
A.instance_eval do
p self #=> A
p #a #=> 1
def m() puts 'm' end
end
sclass = A.singleton_class
p sclass.instance_methods(false).include? :m #=> true
A.m #=> m
a = A.new
a.instance_eval do
p self #=> #<A:0x00007fc497661be8 #b=2>
p #b #=> 2
def m2() puts 'm2' end
end
sclass = a.singleton_class
p sclass.instance_methods(false).include? :m2 #=> true
a.m2 #=> m2
So, inside instance_eval def adds a singleton method to the receiver (an instance method to the singleton class of the receiver). For a class/module that means a class/module method. For other objects, a method that is available for that particular object.
A.class_eval do
p self #=> A
p #a #=> 1
def m() puts 'm' end
end
p A.instance_methods(false).include? :m #=> true
A.new.m #=> m
And, inside class_eval def adds an instance method to the receiver itself (the class/module). class_eval is only available for classes/modules.
Also, when class_eval is passed a block, constant/class variable lookup is not affected:
module A
C = 1
##c = 1
class B
C = 2
##c = 2
end
A::B.class_eval { p [C, ##c] } #=> [1, 1]
A::B.class_eval 'p [C, ##c]' #=> [2, 2]
end
The naming is confusing. I might guess that instance in instance_eval suggests that receiver is treated as an instance (allows to change things for a particular instance), and class in class_eval as a class (allows to change things for a class of objects).
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
How is this explained? Can I replace self with some other object?
This syntax is used in ruby to access an object's metaclass, or singleton class. The metaclass is used to store methods for an individual object.
obj = # whatever...
class <<obj
# here, self is defined as obj's metaclass
# so foo will be an instance method of obj's metaclass
# meaning that we can call obj.foo
def foo
# ...
end
end
# this is equivalent to the above
def obj.foo
# ...
end
This is a core part of the language, and isn't defined in any library.
Also see _why's explanation of metaclasses:
http://whytheluckystiff.net/articles/seeingMetaclassesClearly.html
Also regarding "self" and replacing it, I've seen this mentioned a few other places - it's difficult for me to think of a good use-case for that feature, though it would sure confuse me. Perhaps there is one. In any case, it is invalid syntax in Ruby to try to change the value of "self":
>> self = Object.new
SyntaxError: compile error
(irb):1: Can't change the value of self
self = Object.new
^
from (irb):1
from :0
In Ruby, and in all other languages that have this concept of "self" or "this", it's used as a pointer to "here", as in, this current object, or class, or metaclass, or whichever object represents what "here" means. Since Ruby is interpreted line-by-line, "self" means the enclosing object when the compiler encounters that keyword.
class Array
self # Means Array class (which is an object, actually)
def self.class_method
self # still means Array class, since you're in a class method
end
def hello
self # Means the current instance of Array
end
class << self
self # Means the metaclass (or "eigenclass") of the Array
end
end
You use that syntax to add class methods, which you call on the class, instead of on a particular instance of that class.
For example:
class Foo
class << self
def do_foo
# something useful
end
end
end
Now you can call Foo.do_foo even if you don't have an object of type Foo.
This is equivalent:
class Foo
def self.do_foo
# something useful
end
end