[ruby-core:120743] [Ruby master Bug#21049] Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables`
Issue #21049 has been reported by mame (Yusuke Endoh). ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Open * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #21049 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto). I take all three "expected" in the first example. I'd rather wait for the request for the new (additional) APIs with real-world use-case. Matz. ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049#change-111864 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Open * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #21049 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh). Status changed from Open to Closed Fixed by commit:993fd96ce6bb763e08207bb3d53824d5d46d07a4. ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049#change-112019 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Closed * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #21049 has been updated by daniel.domjan (Dániel Domján). File RM-numbered-params-visible.png added File RM-numbered-params-not-visible.png added @matz, in RubyMine we show users the values of numbered parameters as well while debugging, but after this change we can no longer do so, since we don't have access to them. I think introducing the dedicated API proposed in this issue could be beneficial for all kinds of debug tooling, as it would allow developers to inspect the values of such parameters conveniently. ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049#change-115199 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Closed * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. ---Files-------------------------------- RM-numbered-params-visible.png (50.6 KB) RM-numbered-params-not-visible.png (46.9 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #21049 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto). I'd like to have the following new methods: * `Binding#implicit_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] or [:it]` * `Binding#implicit_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj` * `Binding#implicit_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false` Matz. ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049#change-115581 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Open * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. ---Files-------------------------------- RM-numbered-params-visible.png (50.6 KB) RM-numbered-params-not-visible.png (46.9 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #21049 has been updated by daniel.domjan (Dániel Domján). Thank you for the new methods! ---------------------------------------- Bug #21049: Reconsider handling of the numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variables` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21049#change-115799 * Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh) * Status: Closed * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Backport: 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Currently, `Binding#local_variable*` APIs wrongly handles the numbered parameters. ```ruby # Binding#local_variables includes numbered parameters that should not be visible "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variables #=> expected: [], actual: [:_1] end end # Binding#local_variable_get can read numbered parameters that should not be readable "foo".tap do _1 "bar".tap do p binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> expected: NameError, actual: "foo" end end # Binding#local_variable_set can update numbered parameter "foo".tap do p _1 #=> "foo" binding.local_variable_set(:_1, "bar") # expected: NameError, actual: updates _1 p _1 #=> "bar" end ``` My proposal is to stop handling numbered parameters and "it" parameter in `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. ```ruby "foo".tap do _1 binding.local_variables #=> proposed: [] binding.local_variable_get(:_1) #=> proposed: NameError end ``` Here is a proof-of-concept patch. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/12601 It would be theoretically possible to fix `Binding#local_variable*` APIs to handle numbered parameters while maintaining compatibility as much as possible. However, I think the implicit “it” parameter introduced in Ruby 3.4 poses a spec-level problem. This is because there is no way to distinguish between the implicit “it” parameter and a true local variable named "it". Also, I don't think numbered parameters are local variables, so I feel uncomfortable handling them by `Binding#local_variable*` APIs. If it is absolutely necessary to access numbered parameters or "it" parameter via binding, it would be good to introduce dedicated APIs for the purpose, as: * Binding#numbered_parameters #=> [:_1, :_2, :_3, ...] * Binding#numbered_parameter_get(:_1) #=> obj * Binding#numbered_parameter_defined?(:_1) #=> true or false * Binding#it_get #=> obj * Binding#it_defined? #=> true or false Personally, however, I do not see the need for these APIs currently. I implemented them as proof-of-concept in PR, but I am okay that they are not introduced. ---Files-------------------------------- RM-numbered-params-visible.png (50.6 KB) RM-numbered-params-not-visible.png (46.9 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
participants (3)
-
daniel.domjan -
mame (Yusuke Endoh)
-
matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)