In Ruby, I see that it can be useful to put classes inside modules for the sake of namespacing. I also see that it's possible to put modules inside classes. But I don't see why you'd do that.
Modules are generally mixed into classes, right? So, what would be the purpose of defining a module inside a class?
Modules are a way of grouping together methods, classes, and constants. Modules give you two major benefits. Modules provide a namespace and prevent name clashes.
No, you can't instantiate a module inside a class. Module are static objects that are instantiated before time 0 during elaboration. Classes are dynamic objects that are constructed at or after time 0 during simulation.
A user cannot access instance method directly with the use of the dot operator as he cannot make the instance of the module. To access the instance method defined inside the module, the user has to include the module inside a class and then use the class instance to access that method.
Modules provide a structure to collect Ruby classes, methods, and constants into a single, separately named and defined unit. This is useful so you can avoid clashes with existing classes, methods, and constants, and also so that you can add (mix in) the functionality of modules into your classes.
We could use it when writing ape-like code like this:
class DrugDealer module Drug def happy?; true; end end def approach(victim) victim.extend Drug end end o = Object.new DrugDealer.new.approach(o) o.happy? # => true
Another example that would be more practical in the real world is to have mixins that are only applied by subclasses.
This is useful when some facets of a thing apply to some subclasses and other facets apply to other subclasses, without there being enough order in the way these aspects apply to make way for a clear class hierarchy (tree). Think multiple inheritance! A simplified example:
class Person def handshake :sloppy end def mind_contents :spam end module Proper def handshake :firm end end module Clever def mind_contents :theories end end end class Professor < Person include Proper include Clever # ... end
And so on. Kind of nice, when used sensibly. Even super calls and constructors (I didn't define any here though) flow through all the mixins and classes the way I want them to.
I've since run into a use case in a large Rails app with complex namespacing. A simplified example:
# app/models/invoice/dependents/item.rb class Invoice module Dependents class Item # Define invoice item end end end
Here Invoice
is a class of its own, but is also a good namespace for its dependent items. We can't say module Invoice
because that constant is already defined as a class, but we can still use it as a namespace.
If you use a class as a namespace, and you're using Rails, ensure you do not accidentally declare that class elsewhere. Autoloading will ruin your day. For instance:
# app/helpers/invoice/dependents/items_helper.rb class Invoice # This line will cause you grief module Dependents module ItemsHelper # view helper methods end end end
The fact that class Invoice
is stated in this file creates a load order dependency; if this file's class Invoice
line is executed before your intended class definition, your intended class definition may not work properly. In this example, I can't declare that Invoice
sublcasses ActiveRecord::Base
if Invoice
has already been declared with no parent class.
You could require your "true" class definition file at the top of another file, but at least in a Rails autoloading scenario, you'll have less wrangling to do if you do this instead:
# app/helpers/invoice/dependents/items_helper.rb module Invoice:Dependents::ItemsHelper # view helper methods end
With this syntax, Rails will see the Invoice
constant and use autoload to look it up, finding it in your model file and defining it the way you intended.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With