Issue #19983 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev). Procs don't support anonymous arguments (e.g. to pass them further), see #19370. ```ruby ->(*) { p(*) }.call(1) # no anonymous rest parameter (SyntaxError) ``` So, the code is equivalent to ```ruby def m(*); ->(_) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2) ``` So, the `*` refers to the method's parameters. (Unless I am missing something and support was added into 3.3) ---------------------------------------- Bug #19983: Nested * seems incorrect https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19983#change-105129 * Author: Eregon (Benoit Daloze) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ``` $ ruby -v -e 'def m(*); ->(*) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 1 ``` But I would expect `2`. Much like: ``` $ ruby -e 'def m(a); ->(a) { p(a) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 2 ``` i.e. the inner variable should win. Also affects at least 3.2. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Issue #19983 has been updated by kddnewton (Kevin Newton). `->(*) {}` being a syntax error would break backward compatibility, since `->(*) {}` has always been allowed. It's not different from `->(foo, *, bar) {}`. ---------------------------------------- Bug #19983: Nested * seems incorrect https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19983#change-105133 * Author: Eregon (Benoit Daloze) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ``` $ ruby -v -e 'def m(*); ->(*) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 1 ``` But I would expect `2`. Much like: ``` $ ruby -e 'def m(a); ->(a) { p(a) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 2 ``` i.e. the inner variable should win. Also affects at least 3.2. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Issue #19983 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev). I honestly believe it would be more reasonable to allow anonymous argument handling for procs, too. It would be consistent and clear, no special edge cases due to, say, code copying (yes, there would be edge cases to demonstrate "how confusing you can make the code by abusing the feature," but such demonstrations could be made with Ruby 1.8.6 too). I believe that shadowing of unnamed arguments is not more confusing than shadowing of named arguments, which Ruby always allowed. ---------------------------------------- Bug #19983: Nested * seems incorrect https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19983#change-105136 * Author: Eregon (Benoit Daloze) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ``` $ ruby -v -e 'def m(*); ->(*) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 1 ``` But I would expect `2`. Much like: ``` $ ruby -e 'def m(a); ->(a) { p(a) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 2 ``` i.e. the inner variable should win. Also affects at least 3.2. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Issue #19983 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans). Status changed from Open to Closed This was fixed in Ruby 3.3: ``` $ ruby -v -e 'def m(*); ->(*) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0 (2023-12-25 revision 5124f9ac75) [x86_64-openbsd] -e:1: anonymous rest parameter is also used within block -e: compile error (SyntaxError) ``` ---------------------------------------- Bug #19983: Nested `*` seems incorrect https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19983#change-106192 * Author: Eregon (Benoit Daloze) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: DONTNEED, 3.1: DONTNEED, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- ``` $ ruby -v -e 'def m(*); ->(*) { p(*) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 1 ``` But I would expect `2`. Much like: ``` $ ruby -e 'def m(a); ->(a) { p(a) }; end; m(1).call(2)' ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-30T09:27:06Z master 14fa5e39d7) [x86_64-linux] 2 ``` i.e. the inner variable should win. Also affects at least 3.2. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/