[#102393] [Ruby master Feature#17608] Compact and sum in one step — sawadatsuyoshi@...

Issue #17608 has been reported by sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada).

13 messages 2021/02/04

[#102438] [Ruby master Bug#17619] if false foo=42; end creates a foo local variable set to nil — pkmuldoon@...

Issue #17619 has been reported by pkmuldoon (Phil Muldoon).

10 messages 2021/02/10

[#102631] [Ruby master Feature#17660] Expose information about which basic methods have been redefined — tenderlove@...

Issue #17660 has been reported by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson).

9 messages 2021/02/27

[#102639] [Ruby master Misc#17662] The herdoc pattern used in tests does not syntax highlight correctly in many editors — eregontp@...

Issue #17662 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).

13 messages 2021/02/27

[#102652] [Ruby master Bug#17664] Behavior of sockets changed in Ruby 3.0 to non-blocking — ciconia@...

Issue #17664 has been reported by ciconia (Sharon Rosner).

23 messages 2021/02/28

[ruby-core:102410] [Ruby master Feature#15504] Freeze all Range objects

From: zverok.offline@...
Date: 2021-02-06 10:47:18 UTC
List: ruby-core #102410
Issue #15504 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev).


> if I want to check was called refined method or core?

It actually might be a good feature proposal for Ruby. Because currently, you can tell whether the method is defined by this class, by its parent, by included module, by singleton class... via `Method#owner`. But as far as I can recall, there is no way to ask "whether the method is defined by refinement".

But this whole discussion is unrelated to Range frozenness, honestly :)

----------------------------------------
Feature #15504: Freeze all Range objects
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15504#change-90283

* Author: ko1 (Koichi Sasada)
* Status: Closed
* 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	(リビジョン 66699)
+++ range.c	(作業コピー)
@@ -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: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>

In This Thread

Prev Next