Jay Fields
Posts: 765
Nickname: jayfields
Registered: Sep, 2006
|
Jay Fields is a software developer for ThoughtWorks
|
|
|
|
Ruby: Creating Anonymous Classes
|
Posted: Feb 24, 2008 11:11 AM
|
|
|
This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Ruby Buzz
by Jay Fields.
|
Original Post: Ruby: Creating Anonymous Classes
Feed Title: Jay Fields Thoughts
Feed URL: http://blog.jayfields.com/rss.xml
Feed Description: Thoughts on Software Development
|
Latest Ruby Buzz Posts
Latest Ruby Buzz Posts by Jay Fields
Latest Posts From Jay Fields Thoughts
|
|
Classes in Ruby are first-class objects—each is an instance of class Class. -- ruby-doc.org Most classes are defined using the syntax of the following example.
class Person ... end Defining classes this way is familiar to most developers. Ruby provides another syntax for defining classes using Class.new. The following example also defines the Person class.
Person = Class.new do ... end Class.new(super_class=Object) creates a new anonymous (unnamed) class with the given superclass (or Object if no parameter is given). You can give a class a name by assigning the class object to a constant. -- ruby-doc.org The following example shows that the new class begins as an anonymous Class instance, but becomes a named class when it's assigned to a constant.
klass = Class.new klass.ancestors klass.new.class Person = klass Person.ancestors Person.new.class klass.ancestors klass.new.class klass I generally use traditional syntax when defining named classes, but I have found anonymous classes very helpful when creating maintainable tests. For example, I often need to test instance methods of a Module. The following tests show how you can define a class, include a module, and assert the expected value all within one test method.
require 'test/unit'
module Gateway def post(arg) true end end
class GatewayTest < Test::Unit::TestCase def test_post_returns_true klass = Class.new do include Gateway end assert_equal true, klass.new.post(1) end end There are other ways to solve this issue, but I prefer this solution because it keeps everything necessary for the test within the test itself.
Another advantage to defining classes using Class.new is that you can pass a block to the new method; therefore, the block could access variables defined within the same scope. In practice, I've never needed this feature, but it's worth noting.

Read: Ruby: Creating Anonymous Classes
|
|