[#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:102563] [Ruby master Misc#17637] Endless ranges with `nil` boundary weird behavior
From:
mame@...
Date:
2021-02-17 17:36:11 UTC
List:
ruby-core #102563
Issue #17637 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh).
Hi, I proposed and implemented a endless range.
This is a trade-off between early failure and usability/consistency.
While the feature is indeed error-prone in some cases, it is more consistent and useful.
It is possible to allow only `(1..)` and deny `(1..nil)`.
In fact, `(1..nil)` used to raise an exception for a short period of development phase of Ruby 2.6.
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/48de2ea5f9b9067779acb0f7f76e5f879f2b42c0
But, to create a conditionally endless range, we need to write `max ? (1..max) : (1..)` or `Range.new(1, max)` if `(1..nil)` is prohibited.
The current behavior allows to just write `(1..max)`. Thus, it was reverted.
It is very difficult to change the behavior from now because of the compatibility issue.
But as I recall, this is the third time for me to see this issue reported.
(The first is #14845. I couldn't find the second but I think someone said it in GitHub comments or else.)
If it is a major source of bugs, and if a conditionally endless range is very rare, I'm personally open for the change.
----------------------------------------
Misc #17637: Endless ranges with `nil` boundary weird behavior
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17637#change-90465
* Author: gud (gud gud)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
Basically it's about this https://andycroll.com/ruby/watch-out-for-nils-in-ranges/
Since Ruby 2.6 we have this weird syntax (0..nil) which is really really bug prone
e.g. we have dynamic upper boundary like
```
lower = 0
upper = some_method(arg1, arg2)
(lower..upper).each do { |s| some_method2(s) }
```
We rarely do `nil` checks in Ruby so it's really easy to have Infinity loop in the end.
Previous Argument error was more intuitive since it throws exception instead of silently looping forever.
+ some additional strange behavior:
```
(0..nil).count
=> Infinity
(0..Float::INFINITY).count
=> hangs, I guess same infinity loop
```
Having explicit parameter `Float::INFINITY` (as in previous versions) looks more like a proper design instead of allowing `nil` as a valid parameter.
You may think of it as **I would like to have a range from 0 to nothing, what is it actually ?**
And I guess the answer is **Nothing**.
Fixing `(0..Float::INFINITY).count` this case it also important I believe.
Tested on `ruby 2.7.1p83`
--
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>