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

[ruby-core:119998] [Ruby master Bug#20907] Fiber scheduler does not correctly re-lock mutex if `Mutex#sleep` is interrupted.
by ioquatix (Samuel Williams) 16 Nov '25

16 Nov '25

Issue #20907 has been reported by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20907: Fiber scheduler does not correctly re-lock mutex if `Mutex#sleep` is interrupted. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20907 * Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Status: Open * Assignee: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Backport: 3.1: REQUIRED, 3.2: REQUIRED, 3.3: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- The following test fails with a `ThreadError` instead of a `RuntimeError`: ```ruby def test_condition_variable condition_variable = ::Thread::ConditionVariable.new mutex = ::Thread::Mutex.new error = nil thread = Thread.new do Thread.current.report_on_exception = false scheduler = Scheduler.new Fiber.set_scheduler scheduler fiber = Fiber.schedule do begin mutex.synchronize do condition_variable.wait(mutex) end rescue => error end end fiber.raise(RuntimeError) end thread.join assert_kind_of RuntimeError, error end ``` Fix: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12158 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 3

[ruby-core:121688] [Ruby Feature#21275] Update to Unicode 17.0
by duerst 13 Nov '25

13 Nov '25

Issue #21275 has been reported by duerst (Martin Dürst). ---------------------------------------- Feature #21275: Update to Unicode 17.0 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21275 * Author: duerst (Martin Dürst) * Status: Open * Assignee: duerst (Martin Dürst) * Target version: 3.5 ---------------------------------------- Unicode 17.0 is currently in alpha. Beta is planned for late May, release for September 2025. We just updated to Unicode 16.0, so we can start testing with alpha/beta. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:119895] [Ruby master Bug#20889] IO#ungetc and IO#ungetbyte should not cause IO#pos to report an inaccurate position
by javanthropus (Jeremy Bopp) 13 Nov '25

13 Nov '25

Issue #20889 has been reported by javanthropus (Jeremy Bopp). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20889: IO#ungetc and IO#ungetbyte should not cause IO#pos to report an inaccurate position https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20889 * Author: javanthropus (Jeremy Bopp) * Status: Open * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.6 (2024-11-05 revision 75015d4c1f) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ```ruby require 'tempfile' Tempfile.open(encoding: 'utf-8') do |f| f.write('0123456789') f.rewind f.ungetbyte(93) f.pos # => -1; negative value is surprising! end Tempfile.open(encoding: 'utf-8') do |f| f.write('0123456789') f.rewind f.ungetc('a'.encode('utf-8')) f.pos # => -1; similar to the ungetbyte case end Tempfile.open(encoding: 'utf-8:utf-16le') do |f| f.write('0123456789') f.rewind f.ungetc('a'.encode('utf-16le')) f.pos # => 0; maybe should be -2 to match the previous ungetc case? end ``` It doesn't seem logical that `IO#pos` should ever be affected by `IO#ungetc` or `IO#ungetbyte`. The pushed characters or bytes aren't really in the stream source. The value of `IO#pos` implies that jumping directly to that position via `IO#seek` and reading from there would return the same character or byte that was pushed, but the pushed characters or bytes are lost when the operation to seek in the stream is performed. In the case where `IO#pos` is a negative value, attempting to seek to that position actually raises an exception. In the `IO#ungetc` with character conversion case above, it seems unreasonable to make `IO#pos` report an even less correct position. In that case, the position would need to be adjusted by 2 bytes in reverse due to the internal encoding of the stream, but that is completely inconsistent with the behavior of `IO#pos` when reading from the stream normally where it reports the underlying stream's byte position and not the number of transcoded bytes that have been read: ```ruby require 'tempfile' Tempfile.open(encoding: 'utf-8:utf-16le') do |f| f.write('0123456789') f.rewind f.getc.bytesize # => 2; due to the internal encoding of the stream f.pos # => 1; reports actual bytes read from the stream, not transcoded bytes end ``` Attempting to use `IO#pos` when there are characters or bytes pushed into the read buffer by way of `IO#ungetc` or `IO#ungetbyte` should result in one of the following behaviors: 1. Raise and exception 2. Return the stream's position, clearing the read buffer entirely 3. Return the stream's position, ignoring the pushed characters or bytes, and produce a warning -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

2 1

[ruby-core:122343] [Ruby Misc#21385] Namespace: Suggesting a rename
by fxn (Xavier Noria) 10 Nov '25

10 Nov '25

Issue #21385 has been reported by fxn (Xavier Noria). ---------------------------------------- Misc #21385: Namespace: Suggesting a rename https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21385 * Author: fxn (Xavier Noria) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I'd like to suggest a rename of namespaces. The word "namespace" is already taken in Ruby. We say that classes and modules act as or represent. Constant paths nest them in practice. We say that it is a best practice that gems create their own namespace, etc. If the feature goes ahead with this name, the above sentences, well-established in the Ruby community, will start to sound confusing, because that meaning of "namespace" stays. If you look at the index in Matz's book, "namespaces" is indexed in pages 248–250. Title of section 7.5.1 is "Modules as Namespaces". Besides, I have had a few experiences explaining the proposal to people, and quickly realizing they assume this is something like C++ namespaces or Java packages. Then, I have to undo that mental model and start all over saying "forget that mental model". Those are like our constant paths, only more simple and strict. I think it may also be confusing in this sense (though this could be OK if it wasn't for the previous point.) To be constructive: Some alternative names that I have thought about are "isolates", "shields", or "cells". ("sandboxes" is close, but may have security connotations you do not want to suggest.) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

18 32

[ruby-core:117434] [Ruby master Bug#20409] Missing reporting some invalid breaks
by kddnewton (Kevin Newton) 06 Nov '25

06 Nov '25

Issue #20409 has been reported by kddnewton (Kevin Newton). ---------------------------------------- Bug #20409: Missing reporting some invalid breaks https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20409 * Author: kddnewton (Kevin Newton) * Status: Open * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 7

[ruby-core:116382] [Ruby master Feature#20205] Enable `frozen_string_literal` by default
by byroot (Jean Boussier) 28 Oct '25

28 Oct '25

Issue #20205 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20205: Enable `frozen_string_literal` by default https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20205 * Author: byroot (Jean Boussier) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ### Context The `frozen_string_literal: true` pragma was introduced in Ruby 2.3, and as far as I'm aware the plan was initially to make it the default for Ruby 3.0, but this plan was abandoned because it would be too much of a breaking change without any real further notice. According to Matz, he still wishes to enable `frozen_string_literal` by default in the future, but a reasonable migration plan is required. The main issue is backward compatibility, flipping the switch immediately would break a lot of code, so there must be some deprecation period. The usual the path forward for this kind of change is to emit deprecation warnings one of multiple versions in advance. One example of that was the Ruby 2.7 keyword argument deprecation. It was quite verbose, and some users were initially annoyed, but I think the community pulled through it and I don't seem to hear much about it anymore. So for frozen string literals, the first step would be to start warning when a string that would be frozen in the future is mutated. ### Deprecation Warning Implementation I implemented a quick proof of concept with @etienne in https://github.com/Shopify/ruby/pull/549 In short: - Files with `# frozen_string_literal: true` or `# frozen_string_literal: false` don't change in behavior at all. - Files with no `# frozen_string_literal` comment are compiled to use `putchilledstring` opcode instead of regular `putstring`. - This opcode mark the string with a user flag, when these strings are mutated, a warning is issued. Currently the proof of concept issue the warning at the mutation location, which in some case can make locating where the string was allocated a bit hard. But it is possible to improve it so the message also include the location at which the literal string was allocated, and learning from the keyword argument warning experience, we can record which warnings were already issued to avoid spamming users with duplicated warnings. As currently implemented, there is almost no overhead. If we modify the implementation to record the literal location, we'd incur a small memory overhead for each literal string in a file without an explicit `frozen_string_literal` pragma. But I believe we could do it in a way that has no overhead if `Warning[:deprecated] = false`. ### Timeline The migration would happen in 3 steps, each step can potentially last multiple releases. e.g. `R0` could be `3.4`, `R1` be `3.7` and `R2` be `4.0`. I don't have a strong opinion on the pace. - Release `R0`: introduce the deprecation warning (only if deprecation warnings enabled). - Release `R1`: make the deprecation warning show up regardless of verbosity level. - Release `R2`: make string literals frozen by default. ### Impact Given that `rubocop` is quite popular in the community and it has enforced the usage of `# frozen_string_literal: true` for years now, I suspect a large part of the actively maintained codebases in the wild wouldn't see any warnings. And with recent versions of `minitest` enabling deprecation warnings by default (and [potentially RSpec too](https://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/issues/2867)) the few that didn't migrate will likely be made compatible quickly. The real problem of course are the less actively developed libraries and applications. For such cases, any codebase can remain compatible by setting `RUBYOPT="--disable=frozen_string_literal"`, and so even after `R2` release. The flag would never be removed any legacy codebase can continue upgrading Ruby without changing a single line of cod by just flipping this flag. ### Workflow for library maintainers As a library maintainer, fixing the deprecation warnings can be as simple as prepending `# frozen_string_literal: false` at the top of all their source files, and this will keep working forever. Alternatively they can of course make their code compatible with frozen string literals. Code that is frozen string literal compatible doesn't need to explicitly declare it. Only code that need it turned of need to do so. ### Workflow for application owners For application owners, the workflow is the same than for libraries. However if they depend on a gem that hasn't updated, or that they can't upgrade it, they can run their application with `RUBYOPT="--disable=frozen_string_literal"` and it will keep working forever. Any user running into an incompatibility issue can set `RUBYOPT="--disable=frozen_string_literal"` forever, even in `4.x`, the only thing changing is the default value. And any application for which all dependencies have been made fully frozen string literal compatible can set `RUBYOPT="--enable=frozen_string_literal"` and start immediately removing magic comment from their codebase. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

22 76

[ruby-core:116083] [Ruby master Feature#20163] Introduce #bit_count method on Integer
by garrison (Garrison Jensen) 24 Oct '25

24 Oct '25

Issue #20163 has been reported by garrison (Garrison Jensen). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20163: Introduce #bit_count method on Integer https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20163 * Author: garrison (Garrison Jensen) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- This feature request is to implement a method called #bit_count on Integer that returns the number of ones in the binary representation of the absolute value of the integer. ``` n = 19 n.bit_count #=> 3 (-n).bit_count #=> 3 ``` This is often useful when you use an integer as a bitmask and want to count how many bits are set. This would be equivalent to ``` n.to_s(2).count("1") ``` However, this can be outperformed by ``` def bit_count(n) count = 0 while n > 0 n &= n - 1 # Flip the least significant 1 bit to 0 count += 1 end count end ``` I think this would be a useful addition because it would fit alongside the other bit-related methods defined on integer: `#bit_length,` `#allbits?`, `#anybits?`, `#nobits?`. Also, when working with bitmasks, a minor upgrade to performance often results in a significant improvement. Similar methods from other languages: https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#int.bit_count https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.i32.html#method.count_ones -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

13 24

[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:122164] [Ruby Feature#21347] Add `open_timeout` as an overall timeout option for `Socket.tcp`
by shioimm (Misaki Shioi) 07 Oct '25

07 Oct '25

Issue #21347 has been reported by shioimm (Misaki Shioi). ---------------------------------------- Feature #21347: Add `open_timeout` as an overall timeout option for `Socket.tcp` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21347 * Author: shioimm (Misaki Shioi) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I propose to add an overall timeout option to `Socket.tcp` (and `TCPSocket.new`) ### Background Currently, `TCPSocket.new` and `Socket.tcp` accept two kind of timeout options: - `resolv_timeout`, which controls the timeout for DNS resolution - `connect_timeout`, which controls the timeout for the connection attempt With the introduction of Happy Eyeballs Version 2 (as per [RFC 8305](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8305)) in[ Feature #20108](https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20108) and [Feature #20782](https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20782), both address resolution and connection attempts are now parallelized. As a result, the sum of `resolv_timeout` and `connect_timeout` no longer represents the total timeout duration. This is because, in HEv2, name resolution and connection attempts are performed concurrently, causing the two timeouts to overlap. Example: When `resolv_timeout: 200ms` and `connect_timeout: 100ms` are set: 1. An IPv6 address is resolved after the method starts immediately (IPv4 is still being resolved). 2. A connection attempt is initiated to the IPv6 address 3. After 100ms, `connect_timeout` is exceeded. However, since `resolv_timeout` still has 100ms left, the IPv4 resolution continues. 4. After 200ms from the start, the method raises a `resolv_timeout` error. In this case, the total elapsed time before a timeout is 200ms, not the expected 300ms (100ms + 200ms). Furthermore, in HEv2, connection attempts are also parallelized. It starts a new connection attempts every 250ms for resolved addresses. This makes the definition of `connect_timeout` even more ambiguous—specifically, it becomes unclear from which point the timeout is counted. Additionally, these methods initiate new connection attempts every 250ms (Connection Attempt Delay) for each candidate address, thereby parallelizing connection attempts. However, this behavior makes it unclear from which point in time the connect_timeout is actually measured. Currently, a `connect_timeout` is raised only after the last connection attempt exceeds the timeout. Example: When `connect_timeout: 100ms` is set and 3 address candidates: 1. Connect to address `a` at t=0ms. 2. Connect to address `b` at t=250ms. 3. Connect to address `c` at t=500ms. 4. If all fail, the exception is raised at t=1500ms (1000ms after `c`, 1250ms after `b`, 1500ms after `a`). 1. Start a connection attempt to the address `a` 2. 250ms after step 1, start a new connection attempt to the address `b` 3. 500ms after step 1, start a new connection attempt to the address `c` 4. 1000ms after step 3 (1000ms after starting the connection to `c`, 1250ms after starting the connection to `b,` and 1500ms after starting the connection to `a`) `connect_timeout` is raised This behavior aims to favor successful connections by allowing more time for each attempt, but it results in a timeout model that is difficult to reason about. These methods have supported `resolv_timeout` and `connect_timeout` options even before the introduction of HEv2. However, in many use cases, it would be more convenient if a timeout occurred after a specified duration from the start of the method. Similar functions in other languages (such as PHP, Python, and Go) typically allow specifying only an overall timeout. ### Proposal I propose adding an `open_timeout` option to `Socket.tcp` in the following PR, which triggers a timeout after a specified duration has elapsed from the start of the method. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/13368 The name `open_timeout` aligns with the existing accessor used in `Net::HTTP`. If `open_timeout` is specified together with `resolv_timeout` and `connect_timeout`, I propose that only `open_timeout` be used and the others be ignored. While it is possible to support combinations of `open_timeout`, `resolv_timeout`, and `connect_timeout`, doing so would require defining which timeout takes precedence in which situations. In this case, I believe it is more valuable to keep the behavior simple and easy to understand, rather than supporting more complex use cases. If this proposal is accepted, I also plan to extend `open_timeout` support to `TCPSocket.new`. While the long-term future of `resolv_timeout` and `connect_timeout` may warrant further discussion, I believe the immediate priority is to offer a straightforward way to specify an overall timeout. ### Outcome If `open_timeout` is also supported by `TCPSocket.new`, users would be able to manage total connection timeouts directly in `Net::HTTP#connect` without relying on `Timeout.timeout`. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/aa0f689bf45352c4a592e7f1a044912c40435266/… -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

3 8