Ruby: kind_of? vs. instance_of? vs. is_a?

Solution 1:

kind_of? and is_a? are synonymous.

instance_of? is different from the other two in that it only returns true if the object is an instance of that exact class, not a subclass.

Example:

• "hello".is_a? Object and "hello".kind_of? Object return true because "hello" is a String and String is a subclass of Object.
• However "hello".instance_of? Object returns false.

Solution 2:

What is the difference?

From the documentation:

- (Boolean) instance_of?(class)

Returns true if obj is an instance of the given class.

and:

- (Boolean) is_a?(class)
- (Boolean) kind_of?(class)

Returns true if class is the class of obj, or if class is one of the superclasses of obj or modules included in obj.

If that is unclear, it would be nice to know what exactly is unclear, so that the documentation can be improved.

When should I use which?

Never. Use polymorphism instead.

Why are there so many of them?

I wouldn't call two "many". There are two of them, because they do two different things.

Solution 3:

It is more Ruby-like to ask objects whether they respond to a method you need or not, using respond_to?. This allows both minimal interface and implementation unaware programming.

It is not always applicable of course, thus there is still a possibility to ask about more conservative understanding of "type", which is class or a base class, using the methods you're asking about.

Solution 4:

I also wouldn't call two many (is_a? and kind_of? are aliases of the same method), but if you want to see more possibilities, turn your attention to #class method:

A = Class.new
B = Class.new A

a, b = A.new, B.new
b.class < A # true - means that b.class is a subclass of A
a.class < B # false - means that a.class is not a subclass of A
# Another possibility: Use #ancestors
b.class.ancestors.include? A # true - means that b.class has A among its ancestors
a.class.ancestors.include? B # false - means that B is not an ancestor of a.class