[ruby-core:113978] [Ruby master Feature#19742] Introduce `Module#anonymous?`

Issue #19742 has been updated by janosch-x (Janosch M=FCller).





`#permanent?` is not very descriptive IMO. If I hadn't seen the code above,=
 or the C code with that vocabulary, I would have a hard time guessing what=
 its about. I'd probably guess it has to do with GC or so.



As seen in Xavier Noria's example, the word `anonymous` also does not cover=
 *all* the ways in which a `Module#name` can become useless or wrong.



Then again, it might be really rare that people need to differentiate betwe=
en the const-override case and say, classical anonymous modules or removed =
consts. So maybe it is not worth it to leak these subtleties to end users a=
nd the slightly imprecise `anonymous` is fine. A short and precise name tha=
t covers all cases is hard to find. Something like `#assigned_to_original_c=
onst?` doesn't exactly roll off the tongue...



----------------------------------------

Feature #19742: Introduce `Module#anonymous?`

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19742#change-103636



* Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams)

* Status: Open

* Priority: Normal

----------------------------------------

As a follow-on <from https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19521>, I'd like pro=
pose we introduce `Module#anonymous?`.



In some situations, like logging/formatting, serialisation/deserialization,=
 debugging or meta-programming, we might like to know if a class is a prope=
r constant or not.



However, this brings about some other issues which might need to be discuss=
ed.



After assigning a constant, then removing it, the internal state of Ruby st=
ill believes that the class name is permanent, even thought it's no longer =
true.



e.g.



```

m =3D Module.new

m.anonymous? # true



M =3D m

m.anonyomous # false



Object.send(:remove_const, :M)

M # uninitialized constant M (NameError)



m.anonymous? # false

```



Because RCLASS data structure is not updated after the constant is removed,=
 internally the state still has a "permanent class name".



I want to use this proposal to discuss this issue and whether there is anyt=
hing we should do about such behaviour (or even if it's desirable).



Proposed PR: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/7966



cc @fxn







--=20

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

 ______________________________________________
 ruby-core mailing list -- [e-mail]
 To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
 ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/ruby-c=
ore.ml.ruby-lang.org/