From: "austin (Austin Ziegler) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date: 2025-04-03T03:11:47+00:00
Subject: [ruby-core:121532] [Ruby Feature#14565] Simpler, one-liner, failsafe require in ruby? [Suggested names: require_failsafe, require_safe, require_try, require_add)

Issue #14565 has been updated by austin (Austin Ziegler).


jeromedalbert (Jerome Dalbert) wrote in #note-4:
> I like this feature request, a non-failing require would be great for gems that optionally depend on another gem.
> 
> For example:
> 
> ```ruby
> begin
>   require 'rubocop-rspec'
> rescue LoadError
> end
>  
> if defined?(RuboCop::RSpec)
>   # ...
> end
> ```
> 
> could be turned into something like this
> 
> ```ruby
> if require('rubocop-rspec', exception: false)
>   # ...
> end
> ```

Unfortunately, that `if` will not work, because:

```ruby
p require('yaml') # true
p require('yaml') # false
```

If `LoadError` were a descendant of `StandardError`, then a suffix rescue could work:

```ruby
require 'rubocop-spec' rescue nil
```

I wonder if something could be done with pattern matching here to extend suffix rescues:

```ruby
require 'rubocop-spec' rescue LoadError => nil
```

You would still need to check for `defined?(RuboCop::Rspec)` because of the return value, but���

I do think that `require_try` or even `require(resource, exception: false)` would work nicely without that.

----------------------------------------
Feature #14565: Simpler, one-liner, failsafe require in ruby? [Suggested names: require_failsafe, require_safe, require_try, require_add)
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14565#change-112558

* Author: shevegen (Robert A. Heiler)
* Status: Open
----------------------------------------
I have quite a bit of code like this:

```ruby
begin
  require 'x/tools/cdrskin.rb'
rescue LoadError; end
```

I also use the longer variant, e.g.,

```ruby
begin
  require 'foobar'
rescue LoadError
  puts 'project foobar is not available - consider '\
    'installing it via gem install foobar'
end
```

Often, I do not need to inform the user about missing gems/projects that are tiny and not very important. In my larger ruby projects, I handle cases where a smaller project is not available or available, so I can proceed either way. It is a bit pointless to notify the user when that is me; that is why I would like to have a one-liner.

I am thinking of an API such as any of the following:

    require_failsafe
    require_safe
    require_try
    require_add

This is for loading with a rescue LoadError without notification. If I need to notify a user then I am fine with the longer variant.

If anyone has better names, feel free to add them! I think people are more likely to remember the require-family, e. g. require 'foo.rb' or require_relative 'bar.rb' and so forth.

---

I also wanted to propose a stronger `require`/`import`, including the possibility to refer to `.rb` files without a hardcoded path (if the .rb file is moved,
all explicit requires to it, in particular from external projects, would have to change; and my vague idea is to replace this with some kind of project-specific way to
"label" files and load these files based on these "labels", but that is for another suggestion; I only want to mention it because Hiroshi Shibata made some suggestion as extension to require, and I think the use case he mentioned may also be useful to see whether ruby may get a stronger "load code in files" functionality for ruby 3.x eventually).



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
 ______________________________________________
 ruby-core mailing list -- ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org
 To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-core-leave@ml.ruby-lang.org
 ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/