November 2025 - ruby-core - ml.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:116589] [Ruby master Misc#20238] Use prism for mk_builtin_loader.rb
by kddnewton (Kevin Newton) 13 Mar '26

13 Mar '26

Issue #20238 has been reported by kddnewton (Kevin Newton). ---------------------------------------- Misc #20238: Use prism for mk_builtin_loader.rb https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20238 * Author: kddnewton (Kevin Newton) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- I would like to propose that we use prism for mk_builtin_loader.rb. Right now the Ruby syntax that you can use in builtin classes is restricted to the base Ruby version (2.7). This means you can't use a lot of the nicer syntax that Ruby has shipped in the last couple of years. If we switch to using prism to parse the builtin files instead of using ripper, then we can always use the latest version of Ruby syntax. A pull request for this is here: https://github.com/kddnewton/ruby/pull/65. The approach for the PR is taken from how RJIT bindgen works. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

6 22

[ruby-core:123871] [Ruby Feature#21700] `IO::Buffer.map`: offset argument is "broken" and needs to be made more useful
by trinistr (Alexander Bulancov) 11 Mar '26

11 Mar '26

Issue #21700 has been reported by trinistr (Alexander Bulancov). ---------------------------------------- Feature #21700: `IO::Buffer.map`: offset argument is "broken" and needs to be made more useful https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21700 * Author: trinistr (Alexander Bulancov) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- *This was supposed to be a bug report, but it turned into a feature request halfway through.* `IO::Buffer.map` supports `size` and `offset` arguments to localize buffer to a specific part of mapped file. While `size` works fine, specifying `offset` as anything but 0 is a recipe for disaster. 1. It is practically undocumented. This is it currently: "Optional size and offset of mapping can be specified." While `size` can be whatever user desires, `offset` can only be set to specific values. It was *very* surprising when I started testing it, as I expected it to behave similar to size and offset of a slice. Which values are allowed? That's the next point. 2. Possible values for `offset` are highly platform-dependent. - On Linux it must be a multiple of page size. (https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/mmap.2.html) - On macOS it can be any value? manpage doesn't specify exactly. (https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/System/Conceptual… (I looked at the manpage on a mac, seems to be the same.)) - On Windows it must be a multiple of some value that *isn't* page size and page size doesn't work here. StackOverflow says it's 64 kB, but that didn't work for me. (See dwFileOffsetLow in https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/memoryapi/nf-memoryapi-…) - On other systems? Who knows. 3. On macOS, a buffer successfully created with an offset crashes on read. I don't know why, it's exactly the same file, size and offset that works on Ubuntu, and the read is bounded. 4. Currently, offset doesn't change the buffer's size if unspecified, leading to crashes. I will be making a PR addressing this but still. 5. All of this makes offset unpractical to test, leading to all kinds of problems. So the problem is: this argument is a very low-level detail that requires significant knowledge of all platforms your code may be ever deployed to, even if strictly Ruby is used (no C API), with unexpectedly high footgun potential. I understand that IO::Buffer is a lower-level class, but this seems too much. I propose to make `offset` argument into a convenience for users, allowing any reasonable value (i.e inside the file). Behind the scenes, we can use the native offset for efficieny, on platforms where it works well, but the user API would be decoupled from this. However, I'm not particularly familiar with Ruby internals, so I can't tell how viable this is. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 4

[ruby-core:123913] [Ruby Bug#21711] Prism and parse.y parses private endless method definition with block differently
by tompng (tomoya ishida) 06 Mar '26

06 Mar '26

Issue #21711 has been reported by tompng (tomoya ishida). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21711: Prism and parse.y parses private endless method definition with block differently https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21711 * Author: tompng (tomoya ishida) * Status: Open * ruby -v: ruby 4.0.0dev (2025-11-26T06:41:42Z master 43ed35de6c) +YJIT +MN +PRISM [arm64-darwin24] * Backport: 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- In the following code, `do end` block is passed to `private` in Prism but passed to `tap` in parse.y ~~~ruby private def f = tap do end f # different result(prism: LocalJumpError, parsey: returns main) ~~~ According to https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17398#note-10, `private def hello = puts "Hello" do expr end` should be parsed as `private (def hello = puts "Hello") do expr end`. This is correctly implemented in both Prism and parse.y, but when rhs is `tap do end`, there is a discrepancy. Another example. Prism: parse success, parse.y: syntax error. ~~~ruby private def f = 1 do end ~~~ -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 2

[ruby-core:123894] [Ruby Bug#21709] Inconsistent encoding by Regexp.escape
by thyresias (Thierry Lambert) 26 Feb '26

26 Feb '26

Issue #21709 has been reported by thyresias (Thierry Lambert). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21709: Inconsistent encoding by Regexp.escape https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21709 * Author: thyresias (Thierry Lambert) * Status: Open * ruby -v: ruby 3.4.7 (2025-10-08 revision 7a5688e2a2) +PRISM [x64-mingw-ucrt] * Backport: 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ```ruby %w(foo être).each do |s| puts "string: #{s.inspect} -> #{s.encoding}" puts "escaped: #{Regexp.escape(s).inspect} -> #{Regexp.escape(s).encoding}" end ``` Output: ``` string: "foo" -> UTF-8 escaped: "foo" -> US-ASCII string: "être" -> UTF-8 escaped: "être" -> UTF-8 ``` The result should always match the encoding of the argument. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 13

[ruby-core:117027] [Ruby master Bug#20319] Singleton class is being frozen lazily in some cases
by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) 23 Feb '26

23 Feb '26

Issue #20319 has been reported by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20319: Singleton class is being frozen lazily in some cases https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20319 * Author: andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin) * Status: Open * ruby -v: 3.2.2 * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- I've noticed suspicious behaviour (it doesn't affect anything in practice for me though) when an object becomes frozen only its own singleton class becomes frozen immediately. A singleton class of the immediate singleton class becomes frozen lazily after `#singleton_class` method call: ```ruby o = Object.new klass = o.singleton_class.singleton_class o.freeze puts klass.frozen? # false <== here we expect true puts o.singleton_class.singleton_class.frozen? # true puts klass.frozen? # true ``` I would expect all created singleton classes in an object singleton classes chain to become frozen immediately. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 8

[ruby-core:115196] [Ruby master Feature#19979] Allow methods to declare that they don't accept a block via `&nil`
by ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) 15 Feb '26

15 Feb '26

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/

10 25

[ruby-core:123433] [Ruby Misc#21630] Suggest @Earlopain for core contributor
by kddnewton (Kevin Newton) 12 Feb '26

12 Feb '26

Issue #21630 has been reported by kddnewton (Kevin Newton). ---------------------------------------- Misc #21630: Suggest @Earlopain for core contributor https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21630 * Author: kddnewton (Kevin Newton) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- @Earlopain has been prolifically contributing to Prism for over a year, in addition to other various changes around ruby/ruby, like [96fdaf2e](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/96fdaf2e393933fdd128cd1a41fa9…, [3826019f](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/3826019f310991aedf0612408d7b8…, [a82e7132](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/a82e7132df71bd99b5d02c0c8a348…, and [many more](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commits/master/?author=Earlopain). I would very much like @Earlopain to be able to merge their own contributions to Ruby, since they have been of such high quality for so long. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

8 9

[ruby-core:123449] [Ruby Bug#21633] A `rb_thread_call_without_gvl` loop can cause the fiber scheduler to ignore signals.
by ioquatix (Samuel Williams) 11 Feb '26

11 Feb '26

Issue #21633 has been reported by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21633: A `rb_thread_call_without_gvl` loop can cause the fiber scheduler to ignore signals. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21633 * Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Status: Open * Assignee: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Backport: 3.3: REQUIRED, 3.4: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- The gRPC gem calls `rb_thread_call_without_gvl` in a loop, and doesn't exit when interrupts are delivered if `Thread.handle_interrupt(::SignalException => :never)` is used by the scheduler to create a safe point for asynchronous signal handling. While this may not be considered a bug in any particular part of the system, the combination of the behaviour creates a situation where gRPC can hang for a long time and ignores SIGINT / SIGTERM. ## gRPC Failure Analysis From [`src/ruby/ext/grpc/rb_completion_queue.c`](https://github.com/samuel-williams-shopify/grpc/blob/debug/src/ruby/ext/grpc/rb_completion_queue.c): ```c static void unblock_func(void* param) { next_call_stack* const next_call = (next_call_stack*)param; next_call->interrupted = 1; // ← SIGINT causes this flag to be set } grpc_event rb_completion_queue_pluck(grpc_completion_queue* queue, void* tag, gpr_timespec deadline, const char* reason) { // ... do { next_call.interrupted = 0; // ← Reset flag rb_thread_call_without_gvl(grpc_rb_completion_queue_pluck_no_gil, (void*)&next_call, unblock_func, (void*)&next_call); if (next_call.event.type != GRPC_QUEUE_TIMEOUT) break; } while (next_call.interrupted); // ← The problem! If interrupted, LOOP AGAIN! return next_call.event; } ``` The loop explicitly retries after interruption, making SIGINT/SIGTERM ineffective. This might be considered the expected behaviour if `Thread.handle_interrupt` is used. However, the goal of `Thread.handle_interrupt` in the fiber scheduler is to create a safe point for signal handling, not to prevent them completely. Since this loop never yields back to the scheduler, no such chance exists, and the loop will continue indefinitely. As `rb_thread_call_without_gvl` invokes `vm_check_ints_blocking`, one solution is to yield to the scheduler in the case that there are pending interrupts. This gives the scheduler a chance to handle the incoming SIGINT / SIGTERM signals at the safe point. For a full reproduction of the issue using gRPC: https://github.com/samuel-williams-shopify/grpc-interrupt For the proposed fix: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/14700 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 1

[ruby-core:121683] [Ruby Bug#21272] Class.new doesn't trigger :class TracePoint
by st0012 (Stan Lo) 09 Feb '26

09 Feb '26

Issue #21272 has been reported by st0012 (Stan Lo). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21272: Class.new doesn't trigger :class TracePoint https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21272 * Author: st0012 (Stan Lo) * Status: Open * Backport: 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- According to the official [documentation](https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/master/TracePoint.html#class-T…: > To filter what is traced, you can pass any of the following as events: > > :class > Start a class or module definition. I'd expect `:class` events to be triggered when new classes are defined via `Class.new` as well, but currently that's not the case. Should we either support `Class.new`, or clarify the behaviour in documentation? ### Reproduction ```rb TracePoint.trace(:class) do |tp| puts "Class created at line: #{tp.lineno}" end class Foo; end # Triggers the tracepoint Baz = Class.new # Doesn't trigger the tracepoint # ruby test.rb # Class created at line: 5 ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 8

[ruby-core:118784] [Ruby master Feature#20664] Add `before` and `until` options to Enumerator.produce
by knu (Akinori MUSHA) 08 Feb '26

08 Feb '26

Issue #20664 has been reported by knu (Akinori MUSHA). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20664: Add `before` and `until` options to Enumerator.produce https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20664 * Author: knu (Akinori MUSHA) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- Enumerator.produce provides a nice way to generate an infinite sequence but is a bit awkward to define how to end a sequence. It lacks a simple and easy way to produce typical finite sequences in an intuitive syntax. This proposal attempts to solve the problem by adding these two options to the method: - `before`: when provided, it is used as a predicate to determine if an iteration should end before a generated value gets yielded. - `until`: when provided, it is used as a predicate to determine if an iteration should end until after a generated value gets yielded. Any value that responds to `to_proc` and returns a `Proc` object is accepted in these options. A typical use case for the `before` option is traversing a tree structure to iterate over the ancestors or following/preceding siblings of a node. The `until` option can be used when there is a clear definition of the "last" value to yield. ```ruby enum = Enumerator.produce(File, before: :nil?, &:superclass) enum.to_a #=> [File, IO, Object, BasicObject] enum = Enumerator.produce(3, until: :zero?, &:pred) enum_to_a #=> [3, 2, 1, 0] ``` ---Files-------------------------------- 0001-Add-before-and-until-options-to-Enumerator.produce.patch (10.7 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

6 12