This question has two parts.
In the Ruby Programming Language book, there is an example (section 8.1.1) of extending a string object and class with a module.
First question. Why is it that if you extend a class with a new method, and then create an object/instance of that class, you cannot access that method?
irb(main):001:0> module Greeter; def ciao; "Ciao!"; end; end
=> nil
irb(main):002:0> String.extend(Greeter)
=> String
irb(main):003:0> String.ciao
=> "Ciao!"
irb(main):004:0> x = "foo bar"
=> "foo bar"
irb(main):005:0> x.ciao
NoMethodError: undefined method `ciao' for "foo bar":String
from (irb):5
from :0
irb(main):006:0>
Second part, When I try to extend a Fixnum object, I get an undefined method error. Can someone explain why this works for a string but not a fixnum?
irb(main):045:0> module Greeter; def ciao; "Ciao!"; end; end
=> nil
irb(main):006:0> 3.extend(Greeter)
TypeError: can't define singleton
from (irb):6:in `extend_object'
from (irb):6:in `extend'
from (irb):6
First question. Why is it that if you
extend a class with a new method, and
then create an object/instance of that
class, you cannot access that method?
Because you extended the String class, so #ciao is a class method and not an instance method.
String.send(:include, Greeter)
x = "foo bar"
x.ciao
# => "Ciao!"
Second part, When I try to extend a
Fixnum object, I get an undefined
method error. Can someone explain why
this works for a string but not a
fixnum?
Here's the short answer.
"Fixnums, Symbols, true, nil, and
false are implemented as immediate
values. With immediate values,
variables hold the objects themselves,
rather than references to them.
Singleton methods cannot be defined
for such objects. Two Fixnums of the
same value always represent the same
object instance, so (for example)
instance variables for the Fixnum with
the value "one" are shared between all
the "ones" is the system. This makes
it impossible to define a singleton
method for just one of these."
Off course, you can include/exten the Fixnum class and every Fixnum instance will expose the methods in the Mixin.
This is exactly what Rails/ActiveSupport does in order to allow you to write
3.days.ago
1.hour.from_now
obj.extend(module) adds all the methods in module to obj. When called as String.extend(Greeter) you are adding the methods from Greeter to the instance of Class that represents String.
The easiest way to add additional instance methods to an existing class is to re-open the class. The following examples do the same thing:
class String
include Greeter
end
class String
def ciao
"Ciao!"
end
end
Fixnums (as well as Symbols, true, false and nil) are handled in a different way to normal instances. Two Fixnums with the same value will always be represented by the same object instance. As a result, Ruby doesn't allow you to extend them.
You can of course extend an instance of any other class, e.g.:
t = "Test"
t.extend(Greeter)
t.ciao
=> "Ciao!"
Related
This question already has answers here:
Ruby what class gets a method when there is no explicit receiver?
(2 answers)
Closed 7 months ago.
In Ruby every method is assigned to an object (right?). Ruby provides a lot of "built in" methods and gives the ability to the user to create "user defined" methods.
Built in methods are all defined in a class like String, Integer, Array and so on. Built in methods are all invoked placing a dot after an object followed by the method call.
string = "example"
string = string.reverse
However, when I define a method with the syntax
def method_name (args)
#body
end
to which object is this method assigned? And why when I have to call a method that I have defined I don't use the "dot syntax" but I just write its name and pass it some arguments without applying it to an object, like this:
method_name args
In Ruby every method is assigned to an object (right?)
Incorrect. In Ruby, methods are assigned to modules (including classes). When you call a method on an object, Ruby runtime searches for the method along the object's class's ancestor chain (the object's singleton class -> the object's class ->
the superclass -> superclass's superclass -> ... -> BasicObject). If the method is found, it is bound to the object and gets called, otherwise the Ruby runtime searches for a special method called method_missing and bind it to the current object and calls it.
to which object is this method assigned?
It's assigned to the class Object, as a private instance method.
def foo
:foo
end
Object.private_instance_methods.grep(/foo/)
#=> [:foo]
I guess Ruby does this in order to make top-level "functions" look global.
class A
def self.a
foo
end
def a
foo
end
end
A.a #=> :foo
A.new.a #=> :foo
There is top-level object in Ruby -- main
def method_name(args)
# body
end
self
# => main
self.methods.grep(/method_name/)
# => [:method_name]
main is an instance of Object. Any methods defined in main become instance methods of Object
Object.private_instance_methods.grep(/method_name/)
# => [:method_name]
This makes them available everywhere (because all classes are descendants of Object), meaning that we can call the method without a receiver inside classes
For example
def foo
puts "foo"
end
class X
def y
foo
end
end
# will print foo
X.new.y
# will raise private method `foo' called for #<X:0x000055e406a0f060> (NoMethodError)
# to reproduce don't use irb, just usual file
X.new.foo
Read more
Ruby's Class class lists two methods named 'new':
Class::new is a public class method
Class#new is a public instance method
But when I do:
Class.methods(false)
#=> []
which is supposed to list singleton methods (which I am assuming what class methods are), I get an empty array. Why is this so? Where is Class::new defined?
The methods shown as ::new in the documentation are usually #initialize, for example Range::new:
new(begin, end, exclude_end=false) → rng
Constructs a range using the given begin and end. If the exclude_end parameter is omitted or is false, the rng will include the end object; otherwise, it will be excluded.
This is because you create instances via:
r = Range.new(0, 2) #=> 0..2
Rather than:
r = Range.allocate #=> nil..nil
r.send(:initialize, 0, 2) #=> nil
r #=> 0..2
That's exactly what ::new does – it creates a new instance via allocate, sends it initialize (passing arguments) and returns the instance.
The actual new method is inherited from Class (since Range is an instance of Class) – Class#new:
new(args, ...) → obj
Calls allocate to create a new object of class’s class, then invokes that object’s initialize method, passing it args. This is the method that ends up getting called whenever an object is constructed using .new.
Just like allocate, inherited and superclass (and the instance methods from Class' ancestors like Module as well):
Range.method(:new)
#=> #<Method: Class#new>
Range.method(:allocate)
#=> #<Method: Class#allocate>
Range.method(:ancestors)
#=> #<Method: Class(Module)#ancestors>
So if you call Class.new:
my_string_class = Class.new(String)
#=> #<Class:0x007fdf5485b200>
you just invoke Class#new which is (again) equivalent to:
my_string_class = Class.allocate
my_string_class.send(:initialize, String)
my_string_class
#=> #<Class:0x007fdf5484beb8>
One notable exception is Struct which in fact provide its own new class method:
Struct.method(:new)
#=> #<Method: Struct.new>
Unlike other classes, Struct::new does not return instances of Struct but instances of Class (which are subclasses of Struct).
tl;dr summary:
Why is this so?
Because it's not a singleton method.
Where is Class::new defined?
It isn't. The call Class.new is just calling Class#new (since Class is an instance of itself). The documentation for Foo::new is actually the documentation for Foo#initialize for any class Foo, including Class itself.
If you want to know something about Ruby, it is often a good idea to ask her herself:
new_method = Class.method(:new)
#=> #<Method: Class#new (defined in Class at core/alpha.rb:90)>
The Object#method method returns a Method object representing the method. (Methods aren't objects in Ruby themselves, but you can get a reflective proxy object that represents a method.)
You can ask a Method where it is defined using the Method#owner method:
new_method.owner
#=> Class
As you can see, new is defined in Class and not in Class's singleton class.
You can also ask a Method about the location of its Ruby source code using the Method#source_location method:
new_method.source_location
#=> ['core/alpha.rb', 90]
What this tells us is that Class#new is defined in the file core/alpha.rb on line 90:
def new(*args)
obj = allocate()
Rubinius.asm(args, obj) do |args, obj|
run obj
run args
push_block
send_with_splat :initialize, 0, true
# no pop here, as .asm blocks imply a pop as they're not
# allowed to leak a stack value
end
obj
end
The method is partially implemented in bytecode for performance reasons, but it is basically just:
class Class
def new(*args, &block)
obj = allocate
obj.__send__(:initialize, *args, &block) # because initialize is private
#obj.initialize(*args, &block)
obj
end
end
Now, you might ask yourself: why is there an entry for Class::new in the RDoc documentation, if that method doesn't exist? Well, RDoc knows about the relationship between #initialize which is the method you define but usually don't call directly and Class#new which is the method you call but usually don't define, and it will document #initialize as ::new if it exists.
So, what we really want to look at, is Class#initialize:
initialize_method = Class.method(:initialize)
#=> #<Method: Class#initialize (defined in Class at core/class.rb:15)>
initialize_method.owner
#=> Class
initialize_method.source_location
#=> ['core/class.rb', 15]
This is the source:
def initialize(sclass=Object, name=nil, under=nil)
raise TypeError, "already initialized class" if #instance_type
raise TypeError, "can't make subclass of Class" if Class.equal?(sclass)
set_superclass sclass
# Things (rails) depend on the fact that a normal class is in the constant
# table and have a name BEFORE inherited is run.
under.const_set name, self if under
if sclass
Rubinius.privately do
sclass.inherited self
end
end
super()
end
private :initialize
Class#initialize essentially does three things:
set the superclass
optionally assign the class to a constant to give it a name
call the Class#inherited hook method of the superclass
If you want to know what the relationships between some of the core classes that magically spring into existence at the beginning are, you can take a look at the initialization code of some Ruby execution engines, e.g.
Rubinius: VM::bootstrap_class in machine/ontology.cpp
JRuby: org.jruby.Ruby.initRoot in core/src/main/java/org/jruby/Ruby.java
IronRuby: the initial classes are generated by a program, the generator is in the directory Src/ClassInitGenerator
MRuby: mrb_init_class in src/class.c
Note: depending on what Ruby implementation you use, obviously the places where those methods are defined and how exactly they are defined may vary.
new is defined as a instance method of Class class, rather than a singleton method:
Class.instance_method :new # => #<UnboundMethod: Class#new>
Tricky to note: Class (object) itself is also an instance of Class (class).
Class.instance_of? Class # => true
Some classes like Integer able to create a instance by
Integer(1) #=> 1
It seems the class name works as method name.
How can I create a method like this and when should I use it instead of define a initialize method?
Integer is a Kernel method. In fact, it is defined as Kernel.Integer.
You can simply create a new method that acts as initializer for your custom class:
class Foo
def initialize(arg)
#arg = arg
end
end
def Foo(arg)
Foo.new(arg)
end
Foo("hello")
# => #<Foo:0x007fa7140a0e20 #arg="hello">
However, you should avoid to pollute the main namespace with such methods. Integer (and a few others) exists because the Integer class has no initializer.
Integer.new(1)
# => NoMethodError: undefined method `new' for Integer:Class
Integer can be considered a factory method: it attempts to convert the input into an Integer, and returns the most appropriate concrete class:
Integer(1).class
# => Fixnum
Integer(1000 ** 1000).class
# => Bignum
Unless you have a real reason to create a similar initializer, I'd just avoid it. You can easily create static methods attached to your class that converts the input into an instance.
It’s not a class, it’s a method (Kernel#Integer) that begins with a capital letter.
def Foo(x = 1)
"bar to the #{x}!"
end
Foo(10) #=> "bar to the 10!"
It can co-exist with a constant of the same name as well:
module Foo; end
Foo.new #=> #<Foo:0x007ffcdb5151f0>
Foo() #=> "bar to the 1!"
Generally, though, it’s thought that creating methods that begin with a capital letter is a bad idea and confusing.
Imagine I want to write my own math operators like "+"
The simple version would be:
def plus(a,b)
return a+b
end
But this is not what the real "+" does.
I want 3.add(4) # =>7
But how do I tell ruby to take the object that I used my method on?
I tried
def add(c)
return self+c
end
But I get the error message:
:in <main>': private methodadd' called for 3:Fixnum (NoMethodError)
The problem
You defined the method:
def add(c)
return self + c
end
and attempted to use it thus:
3.add(4) #=> NoMethodError: private method `add' called for 3:Fixnum
Understanding this error message
This error message tells you exactly what the problem is. I think your problem is simply that you don't understand how Ruby invokes methods on objects.
When Ruby sees 3.add(4) it first looks at the receiver, 3, and determines:
3.class #=> Fixnum
This tells it where the method add is defined: in the class Fixnum or in one of Fixnum's ancestor's classes or modules.
So it looks for it there, doesn't find it, and issues an error message. We can confirm it's not there:
Fixnum.instance_methods.include?(:add)
#=> false
So where is add defined?
You did define it, though, so where is it? Let's find out:
method(:add).owner
#=> Object
Object.instance_methods.include?(:add)
#=> false
Object.instance_methods returns an array of all of public instance methods defined on Object and Object's ancestors. add is not among those, so we conclude add is a protected or private method:
Object.protected_instance_methods.include?(:add)
#=> false
Object.private_instance_methods.include?(:add)
#=> true
Let's try invoking that method on an instance of Object:
Object.new.add(4)
#=> NoMethodError:
# private method `add' called for #<Object:0x007fdb6a27fa68>
That makes sense, considering that Object#add is private. We can, however invoke private methods with Object#send:
Object.new.send(:add,4)
#NoMethodError: undefined method `+' for #<Object:0x007fdb6a28e068>
As an exercise, make sure you understand the steps Ruby took that led to her raising this exception (that the instance method + is not defined on Object, or equivalently, that the instance of Object does not have a method +).
By the way, where did you define add? By that, I mean what what was the value of self when you defined it? Let's see:
self #=> main
self.class #=> Object
We see that add must be defined on the class for which its receiver is an instance. (A mouthful, yes, but it's important, so make sure you understand that).
Why is Object#add private rather than public?
Consider:
def greet
puts 'hi'
end
class A
end
A.private_instance_methods.include?(:add)
#=> true
A.new.send(:greet)
#=> 'hi'
The is because A inherits greet from Object:
A.ancestors.include?(Object) #=> true
If Object#greet were public, every built-in class and every class you define would have a public instance method greet. That would result in a great deal of misery. (Suppose you had a method great and mistyped it greet!) Even the private greet could cause trouble.)
Where should add be defined?
Since add.class => Fixnum, we define it thus:
class Fixnum
def add(other)
self + other
end
end
Fixnum.instance_methods.include?(:add) #=> true
3.add(4) #=> 7
Had I included the line puts "self#{self}" after class Fixnum it would have printed "Fixnum". Salting your code with puts statements that show the value of self often helps in understanding what's going on.
One last thing:
method(:add).owner
#=> NameError: undefined method `add' for class `Object'
Why did this not return Fixnum? Since method has no explicit receiver (i.e., no xx.method), Ruby assumes the receiver to be self, which here is:
self #=> main
so she looks for the method method in self.class => Object, and you know what she finds (or, I should say, doesn't find). Instead, we need to write:
Fixnum.instance_method(:add).owner #=> Fixnum
or
3.method(:add).owner #=> Fixnum
Here 3 can of course be replaced by any instance of Fixnum.
Note I've simplified this explanation somewhat. In searching for a method, Ruby also looks in the receiver's singleton class. This is not an issue for immediate objects (numbers, symbols, true, false and nil), however, as they do not have singleton classes:
3.singleton_class #=> TypeError: can't define singleton
By contrast, for example:
[1,2].singleton_class #=> #<Class:#<Array:0x007fbcf18c01a8>>
The plus-sign (+) in ruby can be overridden pretty much like any other method (you can look for operator-overloading):
class MyOperator
attr_accessor :text
def initialize(text)
#text = text
end
def +(operand)
"#{self.text} #{operand.text}"
end
def to_s
self.text
end
end
a = MyOperator.new "Hello"
b = MyOperator.new "World"
puts (a+b)
So there is not much magic to it. But you have to be careful if the overloading the operators make sense in your context.
Newbie question.
I assumed that "inheritance" is the basic feature of Ruby. And every class inherits methods from both its .class and .superclass.
Since NilClass has Class and Object as its .class and .superclass, you'd assume NilClass to have all their methods.
Then my brain exploded when I saw this:
>> NilClass.class
=> Class
>> NilClass.class.methods - NilClass.methods
=> [:nesting, :new]
>> NilClass.superclass
=> Object
>> NilClass.superclass.methods - NilClass.methods
=> [:new]
What is going on?
Can anyone explain what's really going on underlying the whole inheritance mechanism in Ruby?
What does inheritance really mean in Ruby?
I assumed that "inheritance" is the basic feature of Ruby. And every class inherits methods from both its .class and .superclass.
That's correct. Every class inherits methods from its superclass, which is Object by default.
class Foo
end
Foo.superclass #=> Object
Foo responds to Object's class methods and Foo instances respond to Object's instance methods.
Furthermore, every class is an instance of Class and therefore responds to Class' instance methods (just like Foo instances respond to Foo's instance methods):
Foo.class #=> Class
Foo.method(:new)
#=> #<Method: Class#new>
Calling Foo.new simply invokes Class#new.
Since NilClass has Class and Object as its .class and .superclass, you'd assume NilClass to have all their methods.
It would, but nil is a singleton, i.e. there's only one nil instance and you can't create any other instances. This is achieved (among other things) by undefining new. From Ruby's source code:
rb_undef_method(CLASS_OF(rb_cNilClass), "new");
You could do the same in plain Ruby:
Foo.singleton_class.send(:undef_method, :new)
Foo.new
#=> NoMethodError: undefined method `new' for Foo:Class