[#53944] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8210][Open] Multibyte character interfering with end-line character within a regex — "sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)" <sawadatsuyoshi@...>

14 messages 2013/04/03

[#53974] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8215][Open] Support accessing Fiber-locals and backtraces for a Fiber — "halorgium (Tim Carey-Smith)" <ruby-lang-bugs@...>

14 messages 2013/04/03

[#54095] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8237][Open] Logical method chaining via inferred receiver — "wardrop (Tom Wardrop)" <tom@...>

34 messages 2013/04/08

[#54138] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8241][Open] If uri host-part has underscore ( '_' ), 'URI#parse' raise 'URI::InvalidURIError' — "neocoin (Sangmin Ryu)" <neocoin@...>

9 messages 2013/04/09

[#54185] [CommonRuby - Feature #8257][Open] Exception#cause to carry originating exception along with new one — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

43 messages 2013/04/11

[#54196] Encouraging use of CommonRuby — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>

I think we need to do more to encourage the use of the CommonRuby

20 messages 2013/04/11
[#54200] Re: Encouraging use of CommonRuby — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...> 2013/04/11

Hi,

[#54211] Re: Encouraging use of CommonRuby — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2013/04/12

As far as I understand, what is CommonRuby and the process over CommonRuby

[#54207] [CommonRuby - Feature #8258][Open] Dir#escape_glob — "steveklabnik (Steve Klabnik)" <steve@...>

15 messages 2013/04/12

[#54218] [CommonRuby - Feature #8259][Open] Atomic attributes accessors — "funny_falcon (Yura Sokolov)" <funny.falcon@...>

43 messages 2013/04/12

[#54288] [CommonRuby - Feature #8271][Open] Proposal for moving to a more visible, formal process for feature requests — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

15 messages 2013/04/15

[#54333] Requesting Commit Access — Aman Gupta <ruby@...1.net>

Hello ruby-core,

16 messages 2013/04/16

[#54473] [Backport 200 - Backport #8299][Open] Minor error in float parsing — "bobjalex (Bob Alexander)" <bobjalex@...>

27 messages 2013/04/19

[#54532] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8315][Open] mkmf does not include include paths from pkg_config anymore — "Hanmac (Hans Mackowiak)" <hanmac@...>

11 messages 2013/04/23

[#54621] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339][Open] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

43 messages 2013/04/27
[#54643] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — "authorNari (Narihiro Nakamura)" <authorNari@...> 2013/04/28

[#54649] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2013/04/28

(2013/04/28 9:23), authorNari (Narihiro Nakamura) wrote:

[#54657] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339][Open] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...> 2013/04/28

On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 8:19 PM, ko1 (Koichi Sasada)

[#54665] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8344][Open] Status of Psych and Syck — "Eregon (Benoit Daloze)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2013/04/28

[ruby-core:54626] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8341][Open] block_given? (and the actual block) persist between calls to a proc created from a method (using method().to_proc()).

From: "pythonesque (Joshua Yanovski)" <pythonesque@...>
Date: 2013-04-27 21:32:54 UTC
List: ruby-core #54626
Issue #8341 has been reported by pythonesque (Joshua Yanovski).

----------------------------------------
Bug #8341: block_given? (and the actual block) persist between calls to a proc created from a method (using method().to_proc()).
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8341

Author: pythonesque (Joshua Yanovski)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 
ruby -v: 2.0.0-p0
Backport: 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: UNKNOWN


Confirmed on both 2.0.0 and 1.9.2-p290.  A testcase (utilizing RSpec) is attached, but the behavior is easy to demonstrate without a testcase or RSpec.

First, we define a method that can optionally accept a block.
  def foo
    if block_given?
      yield
    else
      puts "No block given."
    end
  end

Then, we convert the method to a proc and store it in a variable.
  method_to_proc = method(:foo).to_proc

Now, we try calling method_to_proc without a block, getting the expected result:
  method_to_proc.call
  # => No block given.

We call it again, this time with a block, and again get the expected result:
  method_to_proc.call { puts "Block given." }
  # => Block given.

But when we call it a third time, again with no block...
  method_to_proc.call
  # => Block given.
...it remembers the previous proc that was passed in.

If we then call it with a new proc, it overwrites the old proc as expected (this is not tested in the testcase, which only tests block_given?):
  method_to_proc.call { puts "New block given." }
  # => New block given.

The testcase verifies this behavior, and also that the behavior does not occur when calling a method in the usual way, or when using method() but not to_proc(), or when using method().to_proc() but not storing the result in the same variable (the last of which isn't that surprising but is included for completeness).

I cannot see any reason that this should be expected behavior.  Either block_given? should work the same way in method.to_proc()s as it does in method()s, or it should always return false, and it certainly shouldn't "remember" the last block used.


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

In This Thread

Prev Next