Issue #18841 has been updated by rubyFeedback (robert heiler). I am not sure we should add more methods from within that family (autoload-family). Personally I would even remove require_relative, but I guess too much code depends on it nowadays. ---------------------------------------- Feature #18841: Proposal: autoload_relative https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18841#change-101912 * Author: fxn (Xavier Noria) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- In my experience, autoloads often reflect an existing hierarchical structure. If a project does not use Zeitwerk, and the user declares autoloads for a class or module, chances are they are for child constants. As an example, see the [`ActiveRecord` module](https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/main/activerecord/lib/active_record.rb). (Those ones do not have a second argument because we define wrapper that derives it by convention, [here](https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/main/activesupport/lib/active_support/de...)). I think it would be convenient to have an `autoload_relative` in the line of `Kernel#require_relative`. It would make existing patterns more concise, and as a practical consequence, you skip `$LOAD_PATH` lookups too. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/