June 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: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: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:114038] [Ruby master Bug#19749] Confirm correct behaviour when attaching private method with `#define_method`
by itarato (Peter Arato) 06 Jun '24

06 Jun '24

Issue #19749 has been reported by itarato (Peter Arato). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19749: Confirm correct behaviour when attaching private method with `#define_method` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19749 * Author: itarato (Peter Arato) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: 3.3.0 * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- This issue is a special case of https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19745: Should dynamically added private methods via `.singleton_class.send(:define_method,...` be accessible publicly? See the following example? ```ruby private def bar; end foo = Object.new foo.singleton_class.send(:define_method, :bar, method(:bar)) foo.bar # No error. ``` The script above runs fine on latest Ruby 3.3. Is this correct to ignore the fact that the added method (method(:bar)) is private? This came up during a TruffleRuby investigation (https://github.com/oracle/truffleruby/issues/3134) where the result for the same script is: `private method 'bar' called for #<Object:0xc8> (NoMethodError)` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 14

[ruby-core:112538] [Ruby master Feature#19458] Expose HEREDOC identifier
by joelhawksley (Joel Hawksley) 04 Jun '24

04 Jun '24

Issue #19458 has been reported by joelhawksley (Joel Hawksley). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19458: Expose HEREDOC identifier https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19458 * Author: joelhawksley (Joel Hawksley) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- I’d like to have access to the HEREDOC identifier. In the ViewComponent framework I help maintain, we added a method to declare a template as such: ```ruby class Component erb_template <<~ERB <h1>Hello, <%= @name %>!</h1> ERB end ``` I'd prefer to be able to write: ```ruby class Component template <<~ERB <h1>Hello, <%= @name %>!</h1> ERB end ``` And be able to see that the argument passed to `.template` was from a HEREDOC with an `ERB` identifier, which would allow me to use the correct template handler to compile the template. I could see this being implemented: 1) As a new property of String, such as `identifier` or `heredoc_identifier`. 2) By having HEREDOCs return a subclass of String that includes an `identifier` property. I'd be happy to work on implementing this change. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

9 13

[ruby-core:113410] [Ruby master Bug#19631] module_eval does not propulate absolute_path for Kernel.caller_locations
by daveola (David Stellar) 27 May '24

27 May '24

Issue #19631 has been reported by daveola (David Stellar). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19631: module_eval does not propulate absolute_path for Kernel.caller_locations https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19631 * Author: daveola (David Stellar) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.2.2 (2023-03-30 revision e51014f9c0) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- I am using module_eval and noticing that since ruby 3.2 the Kernel locations do not have absolute_path for any of the eval code, though the path is available. This is a regression since at least ruby 3.0 which still works. I am on 3.2.2, and here is some sample code: ---- class Script < Module script = %q{ def self.locations Kernel.caller_locations.each { |loc| puts "LOCATION: #{loc}" puts "ABSPATH: #{loc.absolute_path}" puts "PATH: #{loc.path}" } end self.locations } module_eval(script, "/this/is/my/path", 0) end ------ The output for the code at the top of the caller locations (inside the module_eval) is: LOCATION: /this/is/my/path:9:in `<class:Script>' ABSPATH: PATH: /this/is/my/path But the absolute_path should have the correct path data as well -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:112304] [Ruby master Bug#19427] Marshal.load(source, freeze: true) doesn't freeze in some cases
by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) 16 May '24

16 May '24

Issue #19427 has been reported by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19427: Marshal.load(source, freeze: true) doesn't freeze in some cases https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19427 * Author: andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: 3.1 * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- I've noticed that the `freeze` option doesn't work in the following cases: - when dumped object extends a module - when dumped object responds to `#marshal_dump` and `#marshal_load` methods - when dumped object responds to `#_dump` method Is it expected behaviour or a known issue? Examples: ```ruby module M end object = Object.new object.extend(M) object = Marshal.load(Marshal.dump(object), freeze: true) object.frozen? # => false ``` ```ruby class UserMarshal attr_accessor :data def initialize @data = 'stuff' end def marshal_dump() :data end def marshal_load(data) @data = data end end object = Marshal.load(Marshal.dump(UserMarshal.new), freeze: true) object.frozen? # => false ``` ```ruby class UserDefined attr_reader :a, :b def initialize @a = 'stuff' @b = @a end def _dump(depth) Marshal.dump [:stuff, :stuff] end def self._load(data) a, b = Marshal.load data obj = allocate obj.instance_variable_set :@a, a obj.instance_variable_set :@b, b obj end end ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 13

[ruby-core:112873] [Ruby master Bug#19530] `Array#sum` and `Enumerable#sum` sometimes show different behaviours
by dstosik (David Stosik) 16 May '24

16 May '24

Issue #19530 has been reported by dstosik (David Stosik). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19530: `Array#sum` and `Enumerable#sum` sometimes show different behaviours https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19530 * Author: dstosik (David Stosik) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.2.1 (2023-02-08 revision 31819e82c8) [arm64-darwin22] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Hi everyone. 👋🏻 We recently discovered that `Array#sum` and `Enumerable#sum` will output different results in some edge cases. Here's the smallest script I managed to write to reproduce the issue: ``` ruby class Money def initialize(amount) @amount = amount.to_f end def +(other) self.class.new(@amount + other.to_f) end def to_f @amount end end p [7.0].each.sum(Money.new(0)).class #=> Money p [7.0] .sum(Money.new(0)).class #=> Float 💥 ``` I understand that it is expected that `#sum` may not honor custom definitions of the `#+` method (particularly when the summed values are `Float`). However, I would like to bring your attention to the fact that, in the example above, calling `#sum` on an `Array` of `Float` values and calling `#sum` on an `Enumerable` that yields the same `Float` values will return results of different types. I've reproduced the same behaviour with multiple versions of Ruby going from 2.6.5 to 3.2.1. Ideally, I would expect `[7.0].sum(Money.new(0))` to return a `Money` object identical to the one returned by `[7.0].each.sum(Money.new(0))`. I think it would make sense if at least they returned an identical value (even if it is a `Float`). -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 3

[ruby-core:113195] [Ruby master Bug#19592] Unable to statically link a single extension in 3.2.x and >3.1.4
by npic1 (Nat Pic1) 07 Apr '24

07 Apr '24

Issue #19592 has been reported by npic1 (Nat Pic1). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19592: Unable to statically link a single extension in 3.2.x and >3.1.4 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19592 * Author: npic1 (Nat Pic1) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Hi, I need to statically link a single extension (not all of them) by adding it to ext/Setup. This worked until version 3.1.4 and 3.2.x. It appears that this change broke it: [https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-master/repository/git/revisions/79… [https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/6756](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/6…. I have attached a script to reproduce the issue. When running the script, `ldd` fails with: ``` ext/extinit.o: in function `Init_ext': extinit.c:(.text+0x10): undefined reference to `ruby_init_ext' ``` ---Files-------------------------------- ruby_static_test.sh (1.57 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 2