November 2023 - ruby-core - ml.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:111272] [Ruby master Bug#19231] Integer#step and Float::INFINITY - inconsistent behaviour when called with and without a block
by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) 01 Aug '24

01 Aug '24

Issue #19231 has been reported by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19231: Integer#step and Float::INFINITY - inconsistent behaviour when called with and without a block https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19231 * Author: andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: 3.1.2 * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- The initial issue was reported here https://github.com/oracle/truffleruby/issues/2797. `0.step(Float::INFINITY, 10)` returns: - `Integers` when called with a block - `Floats` when called without a block I would expect `Floats` to be returned in both cases. Examples: ```ruby 0.step(100.0, 10).take(1).map(&:class) # => [Float] ``` ```ruby 0.step(Float::INFINITY, 10) { |offset| p offset.class; break } # Integer ``` When `to` argument is a finite `Float` value then calling with a block returns `Floats` as well: ```ruby 0.step(100.0, 10) { |offset| p offset.class; break } # Float ``` Wondering whether it's intentional behaviour. I've found a related issue https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15518. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

6 6

[ruby-core:115196] [Ruby master Feature#19979] Allow methods to declare that they don't accept a block via `&nil`
by ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) 24 Jul '24

24 Jul '24

Issue #19979 has been reported by ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19979: Allow methods to declare that they don't accept a block via `&nil` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19979 * Author: ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ## Abstract This feature proposes new syntax to allow methods to explicitly declare that they don't accept blocks, and makes passing of a block to such methods an error. ## Background In #15554, it was proposed to automatically detect methods that do not use the block passed to them, and to error if a block was passed to such methods. As far as I can tell, it was later on closed since #10499 solved a large part of the problem. That proposal has, as part of the dev meeting discussion, a proposal from @matz to allow methods to use `&nil` to explicitly declare that they don't accept a block. At the time, the proposal was trying to solve a bigger problem, so this sub-proposal was never considered seriously. However, notes in the proposal say: > It is explicit, but it is tough to add this `&nil` parameter declaration to all of methods (do you want to add it to `def []=(i, e, &nil)`?). (I agree `&nil` is valuable on some situations) This proposal extracts that sub-proposal to make this a new language feature. ## Proposal In Ruby, it is always valid for the caller to pass a block to a method call, even if the callee is not expecting a block to be passed. This leads to subtle user errors, where the author of some code assumes a method call uses a block, but the block passed to the method call is silently ignored. The proposal is to introduce `&nil` at method declaration sites to mean "This method does not accept a block". This is symmetric to the ability to pass `&nil` at call sites to mean "I am not passing a block to this method call", which is sometimes useful when making `super` calls (since blocks are always implicitly passed). Explicitly, the proposal is to make the following behaviour be a part of Ruby: ```ruby def find(item = nil, &nil) # some implementation that doesn't call `yield` or `block_given?` end find { |i| i == 42 } # => ArgumentError: passing block to the method `find' that does not accept a block. ``` ## Implementation I assume the implementation would be a grammar change to make `&nil` valid at method declaration sites, as well as raising an `ArgumentError` for methods that are called with a block but are declared with `&nil`. ## Evaluation Since I don't have an implementation, I can't make a proper evaluation of the feature proposal. However, I would expect the language changes to be minimal with no runtime costs for methods that don't use the `&nil` syntax. ## Discussion This proposal has much smaller scope than #15554 so that the Ruby language can start giving library authors the ability to explicitly mark their methods as not accepting a block. This is fully backward compatible, since it is an opt-in behaviour and not an opt-out one. Future directions after this feature proposal could be a way to signal to the VM that any method in a file that doesn't explicitly use `yield`/`block_given?` or explicitly declared a block parameter should be treated as not accepting a block. This can be done via some kind of pragma similar to `frozen_string_literal`, or through other means. However, such future directions are beyond the scope of this proposal. ## Summary Adding the ability for methods to declare that they don't accept a block will make writing code against such methods safer and more resilient, and will prevent silently ignored behaviour that is often hard to catch or troubleshoot. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

9 20

[ruby-core:111448] [Ruby master Bug#19266] URI::Generic should use URI::RFC3986_PARSER instead of URI::DEFAULT_PARSER
by gareth (Gareth Adams) 22 Jul '24

22 Jul '24

Issue #19266 has been reported by gareth (Gareth Adams). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19266: URI::Generic should use URI::RFC3986_PARSER instead of URI::DEFAULT_PARSER https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19266 * Author: gareth (Gareth Adams) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.1.3p185 (2022-11-24 revision 1a6b16756e) [arm64-darwin21] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- In June 2014, [`uri/common` was updated][1] to introduce a RFC3986-compliant parser (`URI::RFC3986_PARSER`) as an alternative to the previous RFC2396 parser, and common methods like `URI()` were updated to use that new parser by default. The only methods in `common` not updated were [`URI.extract` and `URI.regexp`][2] which are marked as obsolete. (The old parser was kept in the `DEFAULT_PARSER` constant despite it not being the default for those methods, presumably for backward compatibility.) However, similar [methods called on `URI::Generic`][3] were never updated to use this new parser. This means that methods like `URI::Generic.build` fail when given input that succeeds normally, and this also affects subclasses like URI::HTTP: ``` $ pry -r uri -r uri/common -r uri/generic [1] pry(main)> URI::Generic.build(host: "underscore_host.example") URI::InvalidComponentError: bad component(expected host component): underscore_host.example from /Users/gareth/.asdf/installs/ruby/3.1.3/lib/ruby/3.1.0/uri/generic.rb:591:in `check_host' [2] pry(main)> URI::HTTP.build(host: "underscore_host.example") URI::InvalidComponentError: bad component(expected host component): underscore_host.example from /Users/gareth/.asdf/installs/ruby/3.1.3/lib/ruby/3.1.0/uri/generic.rb:591:in `check_host' [3] pry(main)> URI("http://underscore_host.example") => #<URI::HTTP http://underscore_host.example> ``` `URI::Generic.new` allows a configurable `parser` positional argument to override the class' default parser, but other factory methods like `.build` don't allow this override. Arguably this doesn't cause problems because at least in the case above, the URI can be built with the polymorphic constructor, but having the option to build URIs from explicit named parts is useful, and leaving the outdated functionality in the `Generic` class is ambiguous. It's possible that the whole Generic class and its subclasses aren't intended to be used directly how I'm intending here, but there's nothing I could see that suggested this is the case. I'm not aware of the entire list of differences between RFC2396 and RFC3986. The relevant difference here is that in RFC2396 an individual segment of a host ([`domainlabel`s][4]) could only be `alphanum | alphanum *( alphanum | "-" ) alphanum`, whereas RFC3986 allows [hostnames][5] to include any of `ALPHA / DIGIT / "-" / "." / "_" / "~"`. It's possible that other differences might cause issues for developers, but since this has gone over 8 years without anyone else caring about this, this is definitely not especially urgent. [1]: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/bb83f32dc3e0424d25fa4e55d8ff32b061320e41 [2]: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/28a17436503c3c4cb7a35b423a894b697cd80da9/… [3]: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/28a17436503c3c4cb7a35b423a894b697cd80da9/… [4]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2396#section-3.2.2 [5]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986#page-13 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

4 8

[ruby-core:113352] [Ruby master Bug#19619] Endless method definition with parameters for an instance given as numbered parameters doesn't work
by okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA) 21 Jul '24

21 Jul '24

Issue #19619 has been reported by okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19619: Endless method definition with parameters for an instance given as numbered parameters doesn't work https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19619 * Author: okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: 3.2.2 * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- This works: ```ruby class Foo def bar(baz) = 'foo' end p Foo.new.bar('baz') ``` This also works: ```ruby o = Object.new o.tap { |obj| def obj.bar(baz) = 'foo' } p o.bar('baz') ``` Even this works: ```ruby o = Object.new o.tap { def _1.bar = 'foo' } p o.bar ``` But this DOESN'T work: ```ruby o = Object.new o.tap { def _1.bar(baz) = 'foo' } p o.bar('baz') ``` So, when we define a method with parameters on an instance given as numbered parameters, it doesn't work. If we change one condition (definition way, parameter existence, and so on), it works. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

4 4

[ruby-core:114792] [Ruby master Bug#19887] RUBYOPT doesn't work unless starting with `-`
by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) 20 Jul '24

20 Jul '24

Issue #19887 has been reported by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19887: RUBYOPT doesn't work unless starting with `-` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19887 * Author: nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) * Status: Assigned * Priority: Normal * Assignee: nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) * Backport: 3.0: REQUIRED, 3.1: REQUIRED, 3.2: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- It was working till 1.8. ```sh-session $ for ruby in ruby{1.{8..9},2.{0..7},3.{0..3}}; do RUBYOPT=w $ruby -e 'puts "'$ruby': #{$VERBOSE}"'; done ruby1.8: true ruby1.9: false ruby2.0: false ruby2.1: false ruby2.2: false ruby2.3: false ruby2.4: false ruby2.5: false ruby2.6: false ruby2.7: false ruby3.0: false ruby3.1: false ruby3.2: false ruby3.3: false ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 2

[ruby-core:114258] [Ruby master Bug#19781] Stack consistency error with tailcall and YJIT enabled
by k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun) 20 Jul '24

20 Jul '24

Issue #19781 has been reported by k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19781: Stack consistency error with tailcall and YJIT enabled https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19781 * Author: k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: yjit * Backport: 3.0: DONTNEED, 3.1: REQUIRED, 3.2: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- ```rb src = <<-EOS def apply_one_and_two(&block) [1, p(1)] end def add_one_and_two apply_one_and_two(&:+) end EOS RubyVM::InstructionSequence.new( "proc {|_|_.class_eval {#{src}}}", __FILE__, __FILE__, 1, tailcall_optimization: true, trace_instruction: false, ).eval[self.singleton_class] def entry add_one_and_two end entry ``` This script causes "Stack consistency error" with `ruby --yjit-call-threshold=1` on any YJIT-enabled build (3.1, 3.2, and master). -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:115549] [Ruby master Bug#20030] `Ripper.tokenize('"\\C-あ"')` separates encoding valid string to encoding invalid string.
by tompng (tomoya ishida) 15 Jul '24

15 Jul '24

Issue #20030 has been reported by tompng (tomoya ishida). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20030: `Ripper.tokenize('"\\C-あ"')` separates encoding valid string to encoding invalid string. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20030 * Author: tompng (tomoya ishida) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-11-30T16:23:25Z master d048bae96b) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ~~~ruby Ripper.tokenize '"\\C-あ"' # or Ripper.tokenize "\"\\C-\u3042\"" # => ["\"", "\x81", "\x82", "\""] ~~~ I expect all tokens to be valid_encoding if the source string is valid_encoding. This is causing IRB crash when typing `"\C-あ"`. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 2

[ruby-core:114932] [Ruby master Bug#19907] Method calls with keyword arguments in eval leaks callcache and callinfo objects
by peterzhu2118 (Peter Zhu) 07 Jul '24

07 Jul '24

Issue #19907 has been reported by peterzhu2118 (Peter Zhu). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19907: Method calls with keyword arguments in eval leaks callcache and callinfo objects https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19907 * Author: peterzhu2118 (Peter Zhu) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- The following script leaks callcache and callinfo objects: ```ruby def foo(a:); end 10.times do 10_000.times do eval(<<~RUBY) foo(a: 1) RUBY end puts "Number of live objects: #{GC.stat(:heap_live_slots)}" puts "Memory usage: #{`ps -o rss= -p #{$$}`}" puts end ``` Output is: ``` Number of live objects: 46248 Memory usage: 16160 Number of live objects: 65902 Memory usage: 19888 Number of live objects: 92656 Memory usage: 24032 Number of live objects: 126791 Memory usage: 28048 Number of live objects: 132919 Memory usage: 28816 Number of live objects: 180687 Memory usage: 32384 Number of live objects: 181957 Memory usage: 32464 Number of live objects: 227485 Memory usage: 34224 Number of live objects: 256101 Memory usage: 37200 Number of live objects: 274151 Memory usage: 38752 ``` After performing a `ObjectSpace.dump_all`, I found that it is leaking callcache and callinfo objects that is being held on by the `Object` class. ```json {"address":"0x102ecef70", "type":"CLASS", "shape_id":2, "slot_size":160, "class":"0x102ecf8d0", "variation_count":0, "superclass":"0x102ecfd30", "real_class_name":"Object", "singleton":true, "references":[ ... ]} {"address":"0x1030c90a0", "type":"IMEMO", "shape_id":0, "slot_size":40, "imemo_type":"callinfo", "mid":"foo", "memsize":40, "flags":{"wb_protected":true}} {"address":"0x102fad568", "type":"IMEMO", "shape_id":0, "slot_size":40, "imemo_type":"callcache", "memsize":40, "flags":{"wb_protected":true, "old":true, "uncollectible":true, "marked":true}} ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 4

[ruby-core:111306] [Ruby master Feature#19236] Allow to create hashes with a specific capacity from Ruby
by byroot (Jean Boussier) 07 Jul '24

07 Jul '24

Issue #19236 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19236: Allow to create hashes with a specific capacity from Ruby https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19236 * Author: byroot (Jean Boussier) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Target version: 3.3 ---------------------------------------- Followup on [Feature #18683] which added a C-API for this purpose. Various protocol parsers such as Redis `RESP3` or `msgpack`, have to create hashes, and they know the size in advance. For efficiency, it would be preferable if they could directly allocate a Hash of the necessary size, so that large hashes wouldn't cause many re-alloccations and re-hash. `String` and `Array` both already offer similar APIs: ```ruby String.new(capacity: XXX) Array.new(XX) / rb_ary_new_capa(long) ``` However there's no such public API for Hashes in Ruby land. ### Proposal I think `Hash` should have a way to create a new hash with a `capacity` parameter. The logical signature of `Hash.new(capacity: 1000)` was deemed too incompatible in [Feature #18683]. @Eregon proposed to add `Hash.create(capacity: 1000)`. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

8 14

[ruby-core:115334] [Ruby master Feature#19998] Emit deprecation warnings when the old (non-Typed) Data_XXX API is used
by byroot (Jean Boussier) 06 Jun '24

06 Jun '24

Issue #19998 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19998: Emit deprecation warnings when the old (non-Typed) Data_XXX API is used https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19998 * Author: byroot (Jean Boussier) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- The replacement API was introduced in Ruby 1.9.2 (2010) [Feature #3064], and the old untyped data API was marked a deprecated in the documentation as of Ruby 2.3.0 (2015): https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/98544c372d948717de22afc86d162e411f1fb5f1 However, as of today, no deprecation warning of any sort is emitted when the API is used. Ultimately removing the old untyped API would allow to easily reclaim 8B on every `T_DATA` which could be used by the newly introduced embedded TypedData objects https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/7440 Was there any discussions about removing the old API at some point? Could we emit a warning when the API is used? Either verbose or non-verbose, to at least surface the issue to gem owners? This would help drive the effort to fix outdated gems, allowing to eventually remove this old API in the future. Looking at our big applications dependencies, there seem to be a small minority of gems still using the old API: - https://rubygems.org/gems/unf_ext - https://rubygems.org/gems/rotoscope - https://rubygems.org/gems/re2 - https://rubygems.org/gems/mysql2 Migrating them over doesn't seem too hard. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

6 11