[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

calling class method from instance ..

Larz

2/10/2009 4:15:00 PM


I was puzzled on this but figured out a way to do it. Figured I'd post
it on here, maybe there's a better way ..

class Test

@c = 2
def self.ctest
puts @c
end

def initialize(i)
@i = i
end

def itest
puts @i
# here's what I was trying to do !!!
puts self.class.ctest
end

end

ob = Test.new(7)

ob.itest
Test.ctest
5 Answers

Robert Dober

2/10/2009 7:15:00 PM

0

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Larz <wbsurfver@gmail.com> wrote:
> puts self.class.ctest
IMHO this call syntax is optimal, because agnostic to the class name.
Robert
--
It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the
dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any
longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but
the world as it will be ... ~ Isaac Asimov

7stud --

2/10/2009 8:28:00 PM

0

Larz wrote:

> puts self.class.ctest


What's the reason for not simply writing your class like this:

class Test
@c = 20

def Test.a
puts @c
end

def b
Test.a
end

end

t = Test.new
t.b

--output:--
20
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

Rick DeNatale

2/10/2009 10:21:00 PM

0

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 3:27 PM, 7stud -- <bbxx789_05ss@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Larz wrote:
>
> > puts self.class.ctest
>
>
> What's the reason for not simply writing your class like this:
>
> class Test
> @c = 20
>
> def Test.a
> puts @c
> end
>
> def b
> Test.a
> end
>
> end
>
> t = Test.new
> t.b
>
> --output:--
> 20
> --
>

That's fine unless you want to, say, override the class method in a subclass

class TestSub < Test

def TestSub.a
puts "doin my own thang."
end
end

t = TestSub.new
t.b
--output is still--
20
--
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denh...
Twitter: http://twitter.com/Ri...

Robert Dober

2/11/2009 12:03:00 AM

0

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:21 PM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> That's fine unless you want to, say, override the class method in a subclass
Good point, but there is another issue here.
Your project guru comes along and tells you: Nice code, but we should
not use the name Test (for a dumb reason of course).
Now you have to change Test to Check in your source
would you prefer to change it here

class Test
def a # multiply this with n entries
self.class.x
end
def self.a
...

or here

class Test
def a
Test.x
end
def Test.a

end


In other words the second version is not DRY and the worst penalty for
unDRYness is the need to change your code.

Robert


--
It is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the
dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any
longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but
the world as it will be ... ~ Isaac Asimov

Mike Gold

2/11/2009 1:03:00 AM

0

Larz wrote:
>
> def itest
> puts @i
> # here's what I was trying to do !!!
> puts self.class.ctest
> end

I think Object#class is something to be avoided in most cases. Frankly
it's none of your business what class was used to create an object. It
doesn't matter _how_ an object sprang into existence, what matters is
how it quacks.

I want to replace an object with a delegate with no ill effects. Or
with a mock object, or with whatever. But uses of Object#class defeat
this.

I would be inclined to make shared data explicit either with a constant
or a with a passed-in reference to the shared data, rather than implicit
with Object#class.

class Test
SHARED = Struct.new(:ctest).new(2)

def itest
puts SHARED.ctest
end
end

Test.new.itest #=> 2
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....