[#121791] [Ruby Bug#21298] `ObjectSpace.allocation_class_path` returns inconsistent results depending on `TracePoint` state — "mame (Yusuke Endoh) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21298 has been reported by mame (Yusuke Endoh).

6 messages 2025/05/01

[#121830] [Ruby Feature#21309] Can Thread::Mutex be Ractor shareable? — "osyoyu (Daisuke Aritomo) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21309 has been reported by osyoyu (Daisuke Aritomo).

11 messages 2025/05/05

[#121837] [Ruby Feature#21311] Namespace on read (revised) — "tagomoris (Satoshi Tagomori) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21311 has been reported by tagomoris (Satoshi Tagomori).

109 messages 2025/05/06

[#121941] [Ruby Bug#21315] Finalizers violate the `rb_ractor_confirm_belonging` assertion — "byroot (Jean Boussier) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21315 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier).

8 messages 2025/05/09

[#121950] [Ruby Bug#21316] Namespaces leak with permanent names — "fxn (Xavier Noria) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21316 has been reported by fxn (Xavier Noria).

10 messages 2025/05/09

[#121956] [Ruby Bug#21321] Namespaces do not support extending mixins — "fxn (Xavier Noria) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21321 has been reported by fxn (Xavier Noria).

8 messages 2025/05/09

[#121973] [Ruby Bug#21322] Namespaces and builtin classes as arguments and return values — "fxn (Xavier Noria) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21322 has been reported by fxn (Xavier Noria).

8 messages 2025/05/10

[#122054] [Ruby Bug#21333] heap-use-after-free caused by rehash during update — "cyruscyliu (Qiang Liu) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21333 has been reported by cyruscyliu (Qiang Liu).

9 messages 2025/05/13

[#122086] [Ruby Bug#21337] Using `not` on the RHS of a logical operator becomes valid syntax with Prism — "koic (Koichi ITO) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21337 has been reported by koic (Koichi ITO).

7 messages 2025/05/14

[#122101] [Ruby Bug#21340] Bump autoconf version to properly handle C23 bool/stdbool defines — "christo (Chris Alberti) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21340 has been reported by christo (Chris Alberti).

12 messages 2025/05/14

[#122114] [Ruby Bug#21341] `Namespace is not a module (TypeError)` without enabling the namespace — "yahonda (Yasuo Honda) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21341 has been reported by yahonda (Yasuo Honda).

7 messages 2025/05/15

[#122121] [Ruby Bug#21342] Segfault: invalid keeping_mutexes when using Mutex in Thread then Fiber after GC — "maciej.mensfeld (Maciej Mensfeld) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21342 has been reported by maciej.mensfeld (Maciej Mensfeld).

11 messages 2025/05/15

[#122154] [Ruby Feature#21346] Introduce `String#ensure_suffix` — "matheusrich (Matheus Richard) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21346 has been reported by matheusrich (Matheus Richard).

21 messages 2025/05/16

[#122164] [Ruby Feature#21347] Add `open_timeout` as an overall timeout option for `Socket.tcp` — "shioimm (Misaki Shioi) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

SXNzdWUgIzIxMzQ3IGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlcG9ydGVkIGJ5IHNoaW9pbW0gKE1pc2FraSBTaGlvaSku

9 messages 2025/05/17

[#122184] [Ruby Misc#21350] Bundled gems lack online documentation — "osyoyu (Daisuke Aritomo) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21350 has been reported by osyoyu (Daisuke Aritomo).

8 messages 2025/05/18

[#122218] [Ruby Bug#21357] Crash in Hash#merge! with ruby-dev in rubocop-rspec test suite — "Earlopain (Earlopain _) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21357 has been reported by Earlopain (Earlopain _).

7 messages 2025/05/21

[#122228] [Ruby Feature#21359] Introduce `Exception#cause=` for Post-Initialization Assignment — "ioquatix (Samuel Williams) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

SXNzdWUgIzIxMzU5IGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlcG9ydGVkIGJ5IGlvcXVhdGl4IChTYW11ZWwgV2lsbGlh

9 messages 2025/05/22

[#122242] [Ruby Feature#21365] Add `Namespace#eval` — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21365 has been reported by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson).

12 messages 2025/05/22

[#122258] [Ruby Misc#21367] Remove link to ruby-doc.org from www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/ — "p8 (Petrik de Heus) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

Issue #21367 has been reported by p8 (Petrik de Heus).

11 messages 2025/05/23

[#122277] [Ruby Bug#21371] Proposal to Remove SPARC Architecture Support from Ruby — "ioquatix (Samuel Williams) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

SXNzdWUgIzIxMzcxIGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlcG9ydGVkIGJ5IGlvcXVhdGl4IChTYW11ZWwgV2lsbGlh

10 messages 2025/05/24

[#122343] [Ruby Misc#21385] Namespace: Suggesting a rename — "fxn (Xavier Noria) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

SXNzdWUgIzIxMzg1IGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlcG9ydGVkIGJ5IGZ4biAoWGF2aWVyIE5vcmlhKS4NCg0K

32 messages 2025/05/30

[#122345] [Ruby Feature#21386] Introduce `Enumerable#join_map` — "matheusrich (Matheus Richard) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>

SXNzdWUgIzIxMzg2IGhhcyBiZWVuIHJlcG9ydGVkIGJ5IG1hdGhldXNyaWNoIChNYXRoZXVzIFJp

12 messages 2025/05/30

[ruby-core:121820] [Ruby Bug#21267] respond_to check in Class#allocate is inconsistent

From: "jhawthorn (John Hawthorn) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date: 2025-05-04 01:19:19 UTC
List: ruby-core #121820
Issue #21267 has been updated by jhawthorn (John Hawthorn).


At RubyKaigi @byroot and I looked at this and came up with a more efficient and resilient way to do the check (https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/a6365cef1084191f992ee55fa661cb9aa2196c39). But coming back to this I again don't think it's effective enough to prevent uninitialized values and we should just remove the check.

Again, this check is trying to avoid users being able to make an uninitialized value of these classes, even if they are trying very hard
``` ruby
>> Class.instance_method(:allocate).bind_call(MatchData)
(irb):6:in 'Class#allocate': calling MatchData.allocate is prohibited (TypeError)
```

However we aren't protecting `new` with this check, and can get uninitialized values that way (even though it has been undefined in the same way as `allocate`):

``` ruby
>> Class.instance_method(:new).bind_call(MatchData)
An error occurred when inspecting the object: #<TypeError: uninitialized MatchData>
Result of Kernel#inspect: #<MatchData:0x00007387517150b0>
```

We thought the reason for this special check rather than using `rb_undef_alloc_func` is so that `dup`/`clone` can still work, but that itself is problematic and a way users can get an uninitialized value.

``` ruby
>> match = "a".match(/./)
=> #<MatchData "a">
>> match.clone # wanting this to work is why we don't rb_undef_alloc_func (I think)
=> #<MatchData "a">
>> def match.initialize_copy(x); end
=> :initialize_copy
>> match.clone # now this makes an uninitialized object
An error occurred when inspecting the object: #<TypeError: uninitialized MatchData>
Result of Kernel#inspect: #<MatchData:0x0000738752cfb370>
```

So I am back to believing we should remove the `rb_obj_respond_to` check, because it doesn't provide any safety. It seems like our only options are to tolerate uninitialized objects or use rb_undef_alloc_func.

----------------------------------------
Bug #21267: respond_to check in Class#allocate is inconsistent
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21267#change-112883

* Author: jhawthorn (John Hawthorn)
* Status: Open
* Backport: 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN, 3.4: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
`Class#allocate` has an additional `rb_obj_respond_to(klass, rb_intern("allocate"))` check to forbid allocate being called on a class where it has been made private or undefined, even if used via ex. `bind_call`.

```
>> Rational.allocate
(irb):1:in '<main>': undefined method 'allocate' for class Rational (NoMethodError)
>> Class.instance_method(:allocate).bind_call(Rational)
(irb):1:in 'Class#allocate': calling Rational.allocate is prohibited (TypeError)
```

However I don't think this provides any additional protection from users accessing an uninitialized object, as the user can redefine allocate to anything to bypass the check:

```
>> Class.instance_method(:allocate).bind_call(Class.new(Rational) {def self.allocate; end})
=> (0/1)
```

Or even override `respond_to_missing?`

```
>> Class.instance_method(:allocate).bind_call(Class.new(Rational) {def self.respond_to_missing? *; true; end})
=> (0/1)
```

So I think we should remove this check. For classes that we need to forbid allocation we should use `rb_undef_alloc_func`.

The classes I see this used for are:
* MatchData
* Refinement
* Module
* Complex
* Rational

My main motivation is that this check makes `Class#allocate` slow. There are ways we could improve that, but I don't think the check as-is is useful. If there's an alternative, more robust, check we'd like to do instead of simply removing this I'd be happy to implement it.

This makes `allocate` ~75% faster.

```
|allocate_no_params            |     19.009M|   20.087M|
|                              |           -|     1.06x|
|allocate_allocate             |     20.587M|   35.882M|
|                              |           -|     1.74x|
```

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/13116



-- 
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/


In This Thread