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

[ruby-core:118243] [Ruby master Feature#20564] Switch default parser to Prism
by kddnewton (Kevin Newton) 22 Oct '25

22 Oct '25

Issue #20564 has been reported by kddnewton (Kevin Newton). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20564: Switch default parser to Prism https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20564 * Author: kddnewton (Kevin Newton) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- This issue is to propose switching the default parser for Ruby to Prism on the master branch. The main goal is to get this default into both master and the next preview so that the community has plenty of time to test before the eventual 3.4 release. Matz has indicated that the final decision about the default parser for Ruby 3.4 will be made later in the year. Decisions about the default parser for Ruby 3.5+ and the relationship between Prism, lrama, parse.y, etc. will also be made at a later time. ## Background For some background on the Prism project itself, here are a couple of links in chronological order that you can read: * https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19741 * https://railsatscale.com/2023-06-12-rewriting-the-ruby-parser/ * https://kddnewton.com/2024/01/23/prism.html * https://railsatscale.com/2024-04-16-prism-in-2024/ ## Status Prism now passes all Ruby tests and specs. Internally at Shopify, it also passes our Core monolith's CI, which is a large and complex Rails application. We are confident that it is ready for production use. External to CRuby, Prism has already been adopted extensively around the ecosystem, including but not limited to: * [JRuby](https://github.com/jruby/jruby/pull/8103) (via Java) * [TruffleRuby](https://github.com/oracle/truffleruby/issues/3117) (via Java) * [Natalie](https://github.com/natalie-lang/natalie/pull/1213) (via C++ and Ruby) * [Opal](https://github.com/opal/opal/pull/2642) (via Ruby and WASM) * [repl_type_completor](https://github.com/ruby/repl_type_completor) * [rubocop](https://docs.rubocop.org/rubocop/configuration.html#setting-the-pa… (via parser translator) * [ruby-lsp](https://github.com/Shopify/ruby-lsp) * [packwerk](https://github.com/Shopify/packwerk/pull/388) (via parser translator) Fortunately with the community adoption, we have been able to find many edge cases and bugs that have been fixed. Thank you so much to everyone who has tried, used, reported problems with, and improved Prism in the last couple of years. We would not have hit this milestone without this community involvement. ## Caveats While Prism correctly accepts and parses all valid Ruby syntax, there are still a number of cases where it does not reject invalid syntax as it should. We are currently working on these cases, and we are confident that we can eliminate them before the next preview release. You can find them listed here: https://github.com/ruby/prism/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Ainvalid…. This is our top priority right now, and I anticipate these being resolved quickly. The other caveat is unknown unknowns: bugs or syntax issues that we have yet to discover. At Shopify we are currently taking numerous steps to mitigate this risk, including: * Prism currently passes all Ruby tests and specs, and will continue to going forward. The tests and specs are extensive, and we are confident this gets us almost all of the way there. * Grammar-based fuzzing to ensure we handle all possible syntax variations (both valid and invalid). As an example, that recently led to the discovery that the current compiler was segfaulting on safe navigation in for loops (https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20468) It has also found several memory leaks that have been fixed. * Mutation testing of existing source files (by adding and deleting random bytes) to find additional edge cases. Our goal is 100% compatibility, and we believe this is achievable through the above techniques and others. The goal of this proposal is to allow more companies to test their codebase against Prism, and to make this easier. We believe that we can sort out the remaining problems much more quickly in that manner. ## Implementation The implementation will be relatively straightforward, as there is already the `--parser` flag that can be used to switch between the current parser and Prism. We will change the default to be `"prism"` instead of `"parse.y"`. There is no plan to remove or change any code related to `parse.y`, `lrama`, or `compile.c` at this time, as we want to create the minimal amount of change possible to ensure stability. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

4 10

[ruby-core:111742] [Ruby master Feature#19326] Please add a better API for passing a Proc to a Ractor
by sdwolfz 18 Oct '25

18 Oct '25

Issue #19326 has been reported by sdwolfz (Codruț Gușoi). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19326: Please add a better API for passing a Proc to a Ractor https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19326 * Author: sdwolfz (Codruț Gușoi) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- Example 1: ```ruby class Worker def initialize(&block) @block = block end def run Ractor.new(@block, &:call) end end worker = Worker.new { 1 } puts worker.run.take ``` Errors with: ``` <internal:ractor>:271:in `new': allocator undefined for Proc (TypeError) from scripts/run.rb:9:in `run' from scripts/run.rb:14:in `<main>' ``` Example 2: ```ruby class Worker def initialize(&block) @block = Ractor.make_shareable(block) end def run Ractor.new(@block, &:call) end end worker = Worker.new { 1 } puts worker.run.take ``` Errors with: ``` <internal:ractor>:820:in `make_shareable': Proc's self is not shareable: #<Proc:0x00007f00394c38b8 scripts/run.rb:13> (Ractor::IsolationError) from scripts/run.rb:5:in `initialize' from scripts/run.rb:13:in `new' from scripts/run.rb:13:in `<main>' ``` Example 3: ```ruby class Worker def initialize(&block) @block = Ractor.make_shareable(block) end def run Ractor.new(@block, &:call) end end worker = Ractor.current.instance_eval { Worker.new { 1 } } puts worker.run.take ``` Works, but having `Ractor.current.instance_eval` as a wrapper around the block is not ideal, as Ractor is supposed to be only an implementation detail in Worker. I know about https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18243 and the discussion around `proc.bind(nil)`. That would actually be ideal, as for the purposes if why I want this functionality I don't care what `self` is in a block, and the less it has access to the better. The general idea is to have a Ractor be able to lazily execute an arbitrary proc. And all the bindings it would need would be passed explicitly, either through `args` in the constructor or through `send`/`receive`, so `self` would really not matter. The benefit: this would make it so concurrent code can be more easily be implemented with Ractors as currently you can execute an arbitrary proc by passing it to a Thread (but you don't get the nice data isolation). -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

6 12

[ruby-core:112552] [Ruby master Bug#19461] Time.local performance tanks in forked process (on macOS only?)
by ioquatix (Samuel Williams) 06 Oct '25

06 Oct '25

Issue #19461 has been reported by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19461: Time.local performance tanks in forked process (on macOS only?) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19461 * Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- The following program demonstrates a performance regression in forked child processes when invoking `Time.local`: ```ruby require 'benchmark' require 'time' def sir_local_alot result = Benchmark.measure do 10_000.times do tm = ::Time.local(2023) end end $stderr.puts result end sir_local_alot pid = fork do sir_local_alot end Process.wait(pid) ``` On Linux the performance is similar, but on macOS, the performance is over 100x worse on my M1 laptop. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

5 10

[ruby-core:116946] [Ruby master Bug#20302] Multiple refinements cannot be applied to the same module
by mame (Yusuke Endoh) 06 Oct '25

06 Oct '25

Issue #20302 has been reported by mame (Yusuke Endoh). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20302: Multiple refinements cannot be applied to the same module https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20302 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Open * Assignee: shugo (Shugo Maeda) * ruby -v: ruby 3.4.0dev (2024-02-20T07:17:20Z master a605234bfa) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- If we are using multiple refinements for the Kernel module, it seems that only the last refinement is enabled. In the following example, we can call `f2` of M2, which is enabled later. but cannot call `f1` of M1. ```ruby module M1 refine(Kernel) do def f1 = :f1 end end module M2 refine(Kernel) do def f2 = :f2 end end class Foo using M1 using M2 def test p f2 #=> :f2 p f1 # expected => :f1 # actual => undefined local variable or method 'f1' for an instance of Foo end end Foo.new.test ``` Note that if I change `refine(Kernel)` to `refine(Object)`, it works as expected. So I think there is a problem only when the refinement target is a module. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:115552] [Ruby master Misc#20032] Propose @kjtsanaktsidis as a commiter
by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) 26 Sep '25

26 Sep '25

Issue #20032 has been reported by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans). ---------------------------------------- Misc #20032: Propose @kjtsanaktsidis as a commiter https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20032 * Author: jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- I'd like to propose @kjtsanaktsidis as a committer, with a focus on bug triaging and fixing. During RubyKaigi 2023, KJ expressed interest in helping triage and fix bugs, and since then, he has fixed numerous bugs. What's most impressive about KJ's contributions is the difficulty of the bugs he has fixed, and the wide range of areas in which he has fixed bugs (GC, threading, FreeBSD support, ractors, rubygems, extensions, tests, old bugs, etc.). Here is a list of bugs KJ has fixed: * #20021 * #19994 * #19928 * #19873 * #19387 * #19680 * #4173 Here is a list of open pull requests submitted by KJ to fix bugs: * #20022 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/9041 * #19991 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8949 and https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8856 * #20001 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8903 * #19717 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8331 * #19144 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/7295 * #18795 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/5992 In addition to these Redmine issues, KJ has also fixed other bugs: * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/9a62fd3cbae2ebb60e2f9cad782af1ad18db4319 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/76dc327eeffefe02577999fe5f8215f762a581b6 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/082962e857833dfc16881cb4dfb44caa175590ba * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/edee9b6a12ac846d7b3de2d704e170bf28178cb3 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/dd406c5a911d2f4a16ce97016666760713540185 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/7bd7aee02e303de27d2cddfc5ef47e612d6782cb * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/05ffc037ad15560cb2c683682c5bc374156571d7 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/7867 * https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/7865 * https://github.com/ruby/zlib/commit/3b9fe962d8 * https://github.com/ruby/zlib/commit/c96e8b9a57 In addition to bug fixing, KJ has also proposed and implemented a useful Socket feature: * #19179 https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/6822 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

8 14

[ruby-core:121390] [Ruby Bug#21188] PRISM does not end reading from tty with ^D twice
by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) 15 Sep '25

15 Sep '25

Issue #21188 has been reported by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21188: PRISM does not end reading from tty with ^D twice https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21188 * Author: nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) * Status: Open * Assignee: prism * Backport: 3.1: DONTNEED, 3.2: DONTNEED, 3.3: DONTNEED, 3.4: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- When reading from tty, `^D` ends the text without the newline. ```console $ cat a ``` Typing `^D` here, only "a" is sent without a newline, and `cat` echos back it. Then by typing `^D` again, an empty read that means EOF causes `cat` to exit. `ruby --parser=parse.y` behaves in this manner: ```console $ ruby --parser=parse.y p __FILE__"-" ``` Typing `^D` twice just after `__FILE__`, and `p` prints `"-"`. However prism requires `^D` thrice. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:120073] [Ruby master Feature#20925] Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line
by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) 12 Sep '25

12 Sep '25

Issue #20925 has been reported by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20925: Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20925 * Author: Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I would like for this to become accepted syntax: condition1 || condition2 condition1 && condition2 condition1 or condition2 condition1 and condition2 This is similar to how method chaining on the second line was added in Ruby 1.9 expr .method And it has the same advantage: when you have a multi-line expression, instead of hunting for the dot or boolean operator at the end of line1, it's right there at the beginning of line2, making the structure very obvious and readable. Please contrast: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption The first expression must rely on indentation to communicate the multi-line nature of the condition, and even then it's not as immediately obvious as the second expression, where we can see easily and immediately that this is a multi-line `&&` condition. This syntax is also similar to how a trailing comma is allowed in arrays and hashes (and method calls since Ruby 1.9), with the same advantage. It makes for a cleaner diff when you add an element to the array/hash/conditional. Taking the previous example, imagine we are adding the condition `&& request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption`. Now contrast the diff between the two styles: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && - request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && + request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption Based on the above I would say this syntax is natural and consistent with existing Ruby syntactical elements, and would greatly improve code readability. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

7 11

[ruby-core:111526] [Ruby master Bug#19288] Ractor JSON parsing significantly slower than linear parsing
by maciej.mensfeld (Maciej Mensfeld) 08 Sep '25

08 Sep '25

Issue #19288 has been reported by maciej.mensfeld (Maciej Mensfeld). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19288: Ractor JSON parsing significantly slower than linear parsing https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19288 * Author: maciej.mensfeld (Maciej Mensfeld) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.2.0 (2022-12-25 revision a528908271) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- a simple benchmark: ```ruby require 'json' require 'benchmark' CONCURRENT = 5 RACTORS = true ELEMENTS = 100_000 data = CONCURRENT.times.map do ELEMENTS.times.map do { rand => rand, rand => rand, rand => rand, rand => rand }.to_json end end ractors = CONCURRENT.times.map do Ractor.new do Ractor.receive.each { JSON.parse(_1) } end end result = Benchmark.measure do if RACTORS CONCURRENT.times do |i| ractors[i].send(data[i], move: false) end ractors.each(&:take) else # Linear without any threads data.each do |piece| piece.each { JSON.parse(_1) } end end end puts result ``` Gives following results on my 8 core machine: ```shell # without ractors: 2.731748 0.003993 2.735741 ( 2.736349) # with ractors 12.580452 5.089802 17.670254 ( 5.209755) ``` I would expect Ractors not to be two times slower on the CPU intense work. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

9 23

[ruby-core:120694] [Ruby master Bug#21039] Ractor.make_shareable breaks block semantics (seeing updated captured variables) of existing blocks
by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) 27 Aug '25

27 Aug '25

Issue #21039 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21039: Ractor.make_shareable breaks block semantics (seeing updated captured variables) of existing blocks https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21039 * Author: Eregon (Benoit Daloze) * Status: Open * Assignee: ko1 (Koichi Sasada) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ```ruby def make_counter count = 0 nil.instance_exec do [-> { count }, -> { count += 1 }] end end get, increment = make_counter reader = Thread.new { sleep 0.01 loop do p get.call sleep 0.1 end } writer = Thread.new { loop do increment.call sleep 0.1 end } ractor_thread = Thread.new { sleep 1 Ractor.make_shareable(get) } sleep 2 ``` This prints: ``` 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 ``` But it should print 1..20, and indeed it does when commenting out the `Ractor.make_shareable(get)`. This shows a given block/Proc instance is concurrently broken by `Ractor.make_shareable`, IOW Ractor is breaking fundamental Ruby semantics of blocks and their captured/outer variables or "environment". It's expected that `Ractor.make_shareable` can `freeze` objects and that may cause some FrozenError, but here it's not a FrozenError, it's wrong values being read. I think what should happen instead is that `Ractor.make_shareable` should create a new Proc and mutate that. However, if the Proc is inside some other object and not just directly the argument, that wouldn't work (like `Ractor.make_shareable([get])`). So I think one fix would to be to only accept Procs for `Ractor.make_shareable(obj, copy: true)`. FWIW that currently doesn't allow Procs, it gives `<internal:ractor>:828:in 'Ractor.make_shareable': allocator undefined for Proc (TypeError)`. I think the only other way, and I think it would be a far better way would be to not support making Procs shareable with `Ractor.make_shareable`. Instead it could be some new method like `isolated { ... }` or `Proc.isolated { ... }` or `Proc.snapshot_outer_variables { ... }` or so, only accepting a literal block (to avoid mutating/breaking an existing block), and that would snapshot outer variables (or require no outer variables like Ractor.new's block, or maybe even do `Ractor.make_shareable(copy: true)` on outer variables) and possibly also set `self` since that's anyway needed. That would make such blocks with different semantics explicit, which would fix the problem of breaking the intention of who wrote that block and whoever read that code, expecting normal Ruby block semantics, which includes seeing updated outer variables. Related: #21033 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18243#note-5 Extracted from https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21033#note-14 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

7 25

[ruby-core:120873] [Ruby master Bug#21111] RbConfig::CONFIG['CXX'] quietly set to "false" when Ruby cannot build C++ programs
by stanhu (Stan Hu) 21 Aug '25

21 Aug '25

Issue #21111 has been reported by stanhu (Stan Hu). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21111: RbConfig::CONFIG['CXX'] quietly set to "false" when Ruby cannot build C++ programs https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21111 * Author: stanhu (Stan Hu) * Status: Open * ruby -v: ruby 3.4.1 (2024-12-25 revision 48d4efcb85) +YJIT +PRISM [arm64-darwin24] * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- As reported in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-development-kit/-/issues/2222 and https://trac.macports.org/ticket/70750, we've had numerous macOS users experience problems with compiling Ruby C++ extensions after upgrading to XCode 16. Users have had to fix their XCode setups and reinstall Ruby when this happens. It turns out that when Ruby can't build a CXX program, it essentially sets CXX to the `false` string. From https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/7317f96727725ca37ddb06011918deb841de371c/…: ``` AS_IF([test -n "${rb_there_is_in_fact_no_gplusplus_but_autoconf_is_cheating_us}"], [ AC_MSG_NOTICE([Test skipped due to lack of a C++ compiler.]) ], [test -n "${CXX}"], [ RUBY_WERROR_FLAG([ AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether CXXFLAGS is valid]) AC_LANG_PUSH(C++) AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([[@%:@include <cstdio>]], [[]])], [AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)],[ AC_MSG_RESULT(no) # The message mentions CXXFLAGS, but CPPFLAGS might also affects. AC_MSG_WARN([something wrong with CXXFLAGS="$CXXFLAGS"]) CXX=false ``` This causes C++ extensions, such as `unf_ext`, to fail while attempting to compile native extensions. There are no error messages because `false` is executed, so users only see: ``` Installing unf_ext 0.0.8.2 with native extensions Gem::Ext::BuildError: ERROR: Failed to build gem native extension. current directory: /Users/myuser/.rvm/gems/ruby-3.3.7/gems/unf_ext-0.0.8.2/ext/unf_ext /Users/kerrizor/.rvm/rubies/ruby-3.3.7/bin/ruby extconf.rb checking for -lstdc++... yes creating Makefile current directory: /Users/myuser/.rvm/gems/ruby-3.3.7/gems/unf_ext-0.0.8.2/ext/unf_ext make DESTDIR\= sitearchdir\=./.gem.20250203-69237-u2oi17 sitelibdir\=./.gem.20250203-69237-u2oi17 clean current directory: /Users/myuser/.rvm/gems/ruby-3.3.7/gems/unf_ext-0.0.8.2/ext/unf_ext make DESTDIR\= sitearchdir\=./.gem.20250203-69237-u2oi17 sitelibdir\=./.gem.20250203-69237-u2oi17 compiling unf.cc make: *** [unf.o] Error 1 ``` `unf_ext` only checks whether `RbConfig::CONFIG['CXX']` is defined, not that it is `false`: https://github.com/knu/ruby-unf_ext/blob/c72a36d0a5ea9fe3950611b0f289fc68a2…. Questions: 1. Should CXX just be set to `nil`? Or should all C++ extensions be expected to check for `false`? The latter seems surprising to me. 2. Should there be a way to fail the Ruby build if a valid C++ compiler is not found? -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

7 9