From: Shugo Maeda <shugo@...>
Date: 2012-01-13T11:07:31+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:42105] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5887] The documentation of Module.constants is incorrect

Hi,

2012/1/13 Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@marc-andre.ca>:
>> OT: I think Module.constants should be renamed in the future, because Module.constants is confusing with Module#constants. �Why the hell do I have to write the following tricky code to invoke Module#constants on Module itself?
>>
>> � p Module.instance_method(:constants).bind(Module).call
>
> Actually, you can simply pass a parameter to `Module.constants` and the singleton method will call the instance method. The documentation should definitely reflect this too...

Oh, I didn't know that.  However, I doubt that Matz has accepted the feature.

The optional arguments of Module.constants were introduced by nobu in
r11338, but the change of Module.constants was not described in the
commit log.

    * intern.h, object.c, variable.c (rb_mod_constants): added an optional
      flag to search ancestors, which is defaulted to true, as well as
      const_defined? and const_get.  [ruby-dev:29989]

It was not discussed in the thread starting from [ruby-dev:29989] either.

Is it an official feature?

-- 
Shugo Maeda