I’ve been trying to set up a system whereby I can generate a series of similar Ruby classes, distinguished by an integer parameter, which I save into a class variable of the relevant class – something akin to C++ templates.
However, referencing (hence, creating) a new version of the templated class overwrites the saved parameters in the previous versions, and I can’t work out why.
Here’s a minimal example
class Object
def self.const_missing(name)
if name =~ /^Templ(\d+)$/
return make_templ $1.to_i
else
raise NameError.new("uninitialised constant #{name}")
end
end
private
def make_templ(base)
# Make sure we don't define twice
if Object.const_defined? "Templ#{base}"
return Object.const_get "Templ#{base}"
else
# Define a stub class
Object.class_eval "class Templ#{base}; end"
# Open the class and define the actual things we need.
Object.const_get("Templ#{base}").class_exec(base) do |in_base|
@@base = in_base
def initialize
puts "Inited with base == #{@@base}"
end
end
Object.const_get("Templ#{base}")
end
end
end
irb(main):002:0> Templ1.new
Inited with base == 1
=> #<Templ1:0x26c11c8>
irb(main):003:0> Templ2.new
Inited with base == 2
=> #<Templ2:0x20a8370>
irb(main):004:0> Templ1.new
Inited with base == 2
=> #<Templ1:0x261d908>
Have I found a bug in my Ruby (ruby 1.9.2p290 (2011-07-09) [i386-mingw32]), or have I simply coded something wrong?
Because you first syntactically reference
@@basein the context of class Object, it’s a class variable of Object and all the TemplX subclasses of object refer to the superclass’s class var. You can change your code to use Module#class_variable_set andclass_variable_getto avoid the binding in the superclass.A few other issues with your code: I note you didn’t make
make_templa class method peer ofself.const_missing, though it dispatched successfully because Object is an ancestor of Class. It’s best to avoid all forms of eval(string) when other methods exist. You shouldn’t raise NameError if you don’t handle the const_missing, but rather dispatch to super as someone else may be in the chain and want to do something to resolve the constant.Class variables have interesting and often undesirable information mixing properties through inheritance. You’ve hit one of the gotchas. I don’t know what other properties you need around
@@base, but it looks likely that you’ll get better isolation and less suprising results using a class instance variable instead. For more explanation: Fowler, RailsTips