From: matz@... Date: 2020-09-25T08:49:04+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:100130] [Ruby master Feature#15504] Freeze all Range objects Issue #15504 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto). I agree with making ranges frozen. I don't see any particular case that could be broken by frozen ranges. Since there's possiblity of breakage, I'd like to experiment it. Matz. ---------------------------------------- Feature #15504: Freeze all Range objects https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15504#change-87700 * Author: ko1 (Koichi Sasada) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) ---------------------------------------- # Abstract Range is currently non-frozen. How about freezing all Range objects? # Background We froze some types of objects: Numerics (r47523) and Symbols [Feature #8906]. I believe that making objects immutable solves some kinds of programming difficulties. `Range` is mutable at least when written as Range literal. So we can write the following weird program: ```ruby 2.times{ r = (1..3) p r.instance_variable_get(:@foo) #=> 1st time: nil #=> 2nd time: :bar r.instance_variable_set(:@foo, :bar) } ``` In `range.c`, there is a comment (thanks znz-san): ```c static void range_modify(VALUE range) { rb_check_frozen(range); /* Ranges are immutable, so that they should be initialized only once. */ if (RANGE_EXCL(range) != Qnil) { rb_name_err_raise("`initialize' called twice", range, ID2SYM(idInitialize)); } } ``` # Patch ``` Index: range.c =================================================================== --- range.c (��������������� 66699) +++ range.c (���������������) @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ RANGE_SET_EXCL(range, exclude_end); RANGE_SET_BEG(range, beg); RANGE_SET_END(range, end); + + rb_obj_freeze(range); } VALUE ``` # Discussion There are several usages of mutable Range in the tests. * (1) Taint-flag * (2) Add singleton methods. * (3) Subclass with mutable states Maybe (2) and (3) are crucial. Thanks, Koichi -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: