亚洲国产日韩欧美一区二区三区,精品亚洲国产成人av在线,国产99视频精品免视看7,99国产精品久久久久久久成人热,欧美日韩亚洲国产综合乱

def opens a new scope

n = 5
local_variables       # => [:n, :_]
def num
  local_variables     # => []
end

If you want to access n, you need to use flattening scope

define_method :num do
    puts n
end

@n = 5
def num
    puts @n
end

I am also a beginner, let’s see what other experts say.

But it can be executed using this method in python or js!

Read-only in Python

The following is a guess as to why Ruby did this?

In Ruby, the proc generated by def 生成的方法只能訪問全局變量。
define_method 生成的方法 和 -> (param) {} 或 lambda { |param| } has a closure and can access outer variables.

I guess it’s because Ruby thinks that the most common situation is that you don’t need to access outer variables, so def doesn’t give you access. This has the advantage:

• Won’t mess with outer variables unintentionally like js. In order to avoid this in JavaScript, all variables used in the body must be undefined in the function header, which is very verbose.
• No need to create closures, saving overhead.

As for lambdas with closures, that’s normal. Is it okay to use lambdas without closures?

As for define_method, I guess it’s because

• define_method Because it is so-called metaprogramming, there is a greater chance of using outer variables. (Originally, using metaprogramming means being lazy and typing less. If you can’t use outer variables and have to pass them in as parameters, it will be exhausting.) So I use closed loops. Bag.
It is sometimes inconvenient that the
• method definition cannot have closures, but it is usually not necessary, so let the longer define_method have closures.
• define_method 除了 define_method （symbol) { |param| }，還可以寫成 define_method(symbol, method)，其中 method 比較常用的就是傳入一個 lambda，既然傳入 lambda，如果本身 define_method In addition to define_method (symbol) { |param| }, it can also be written as define_method(symbol, method), among which method is more commonly used to pass Enter a lambda. Since lambda is passed in, if it does not have a closure, it will be very inconsistent, so let it do so.

@Andrew_375683 is right.
Mainly it’s a matter of scope
But here is a simple way to solve it, just turn n into a function

def n
  5
end

def num
  p n
end

num

This question is very popular. I just went there and a few people answered me when I came back.

You think the n in your code is a global variable, but unfortunately it’s not

irb(main):006:0> x =10
=> 10
irb(main):009:0> defined? x
=> "local-variable"

If you need to modify it, just add $ as a prefix:

irb(main):010:0> $x = 1
=> 1
irb(main):011:0> defined? $x
=> "global-variable"

In the beautiful ruby ??style, $ is so eye-catching. The Ruby boss knows that global variables are indispensable, but he is also afraid of abuse, so he plays a little trick;). It involves the knowledge of ruby ??variables scope. The advantages of ruby ??are complex and unique.

@andrewzhyl Well said, like it.

Make a note: The difference between def and def_method: def is a keyword used to define a method; def_method is a method, and its function is to generate a new method. The code in def is completely isolated from the context (only @ and (beautiful variables); and define_method is more open and willing to meet friends without any modification.