From: "Eregon (Benoit Daloze)" Date: 2022-08-18T09:24:14+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:109538] [Ruby master Bug#18435] Calling `protected` on ancestor method changes result of `instance_methods(false)` Issue #18435 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). @matz agreed to remove ZSUPER methods, because the current illusion is incomplete. In practice the semantics are the same (code is unlikely to monkey-patch a method after making it public), except owner/instance_methods is more consistent with "alias/copy" semantics. I'll make a PR. ---------------------------------------- Bug #18435: Calling `protected` on ancestor method changes result of `instance_methods(false)` https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18435#change-98709 * Author: ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 2.7.5p203 (2021-11-24 revision f69aeb8314) [x86_64-darwin20] * Backport: 2.6: DONTNEED, 2.7: DONTNEED, 3.0: DONTNEED, 3.1: REQUIRED ---------------------------------------- As documented `instance_methods(false)` works as follows: ```ruby module A def method1() end end class B include A def method2() end end p B.instance_methods(false) #=> [:method2] ``` However, calling `protected` on the method defined by `A`, unexpectedly changes the result of `instance_methods(false)` on `B`, even though the owner of the method is still `A`: ```ruby module A def method1() end end class B include A protected :method1 def method2() end end p B.instance_methods(false) #=> [:method1, :method2] p B.instance_method(:method1).owner #=> A ``` In contrast, calling `private` or `public` on the same method does not cause any changes on the result of `B.instance_methods(false)`. This feels like a bug in the implementation of `instance_methods(false)`, but, if it is by design, it should at least be documented on `Module#instance_methods`. This reproduction script gives the same output all the way from Ruby 2.0 up to Ruby-HEAD: https://wandbox.org/permlink/LqbXMBTYxURRZmDz -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: