Issue #19117 has been updated by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme). If "rescue in" is removed, then what happens to the similar "block in" ? Also in terms of quotes, what are your thoughts on `from ./test.rb:16:in 'block in Concrete#oops'` vs `from ./test.rb:16:in block in 'Concrete#oops'` ---------------------------------------- Feature #19117: Include the method owner in backtraces, not just the method name https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19117#change-106834 * Author: byroot (Jean Boussier) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal * Target version: 3.4 ---------------------------------------- ``` module Foo class Bar def inspect 1 + '1' end end end p Foo::Bar.new ``` This code produce the following backtrace: ``` /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `+': String can't be coerced into Integer (TypeError) from /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `inspect' from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `p' from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `<main>' ``` This works, but on large codebases and large backtraces the method name isn't always all that revealing, most of the time you need to open many of the locations listed in the backtrace to really understand what is going on. I propose that we also include the owner name: ``` /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `Integer#+': String can't be coerced into Integer (TypeError) from /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `Foo::Bar#inspect' from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `Kernel#p' from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `<main>' ``` I believe that in many case it would allow to much better understand the backtrace without having to jump back and forth between it and the source code. This is inspired by @ivoanjo 's `backtracie` gem: https://github.com/ivoanjo/backtracie -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/