Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>The languages might permit it, but neither community condones the practice. Monkeypatching isn't condoned in either language, but you hear about it more often in Ruby because the form of open class it uses makes it very, very easy to monkeypatch a class and because of this, <a href="http://avdi.org/devblog/2008/02/23/why-monkeypatching-is-destroying-ruby/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">it's more acceptable in the Ruby community, but still frowned upon</a>. Monkeypatching simply isn't as prevalent or as easy in Python, which is why you won't hear the same arguments against it in that community. Python does nothing that Ruby doesn't do to prevent the practice.</p> <p>The reason you hear/read about it more often in Ruby is that this in Ruby:</p> <pre class="lang-ruby prettyprint-override"><code>class MyClass def foo puts "foo" end end </code></pre> <pre class="lang-ruby prettyprint-override"><code>class MyClass def bar puts "bar" end end </code></pre> <p>will give you a class that contains two methods, <code>foo</code> and <code>bar</code>, whereas this in Python:</p> <pre class="lang-python prettyprint-override"><code>class MyClass: def foo(self): print "foo" </code></pre> <pre class="lang-python prettyprint-override"><code>class MyClass: def bar(self): print "bar" </code></pre> <p>will leave you with a class that only contains the method <code>bar</code>, as redefinition of a class clobbers the previous definition completely. To monkeypatch in Python, you actually have to write this:</p> <pre class="lang-python prettyprint-override"><code>class MyClass: def foo(self): print "foo" </code></pre> <pre class="lang-python prettyprint-override"><code>def bar(self): print "bar" MyClass.bar = bar </code></pre> <p>which is harder than the Ruby version. That alone makes Ruby code much easier to monkeypatch than Python code.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POIf monkey patching is permitted in both Ruby and Python, why is it more controversial in Ruby?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USRory O'Kane
    1. USKeith Gaughan
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COYour Python example is valid, too. The second definition just creates a new MyClass-class and does not extend the previous one (I guess thats what ruby does).
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
    2. COYou should add a note that it's technically valid
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. UShasen
    3. COCan you provide some reference that shows the Ruby "community" not condoning the practice? What about ActiveSupport::CoreExtensions?
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USMike Woodhouse
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload