[#56333] [CommonRuby - Feature #8723][Open] Array.any? predicate returns true for empty array. — "nurettin (Nurettin Onur TUGCU)" <onurtugcu@...>

12 messages 2013/08/02

[#56368] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8730][Open] "rescue Exception" rescues Timeout::ExitException — "takiuchi (Genki Takiuchi)" <genki@...21g.com>

15 messages 2013/08/04

[#56407] [ruby-trunk - misc #8741][Open] email notification on bugs.ruby-lang.org is broken — "rits (First Last)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2013/08/05

[#56524] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8770][Open] [PATCH] process.c: avoid EINTR from Process.spawn — "normalperson (Eric Wong)" <normalperson@...>

19 messages 2013/08/10

[#56536] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8772][Open] Hash alias #| merge, and the case for Hash and Array polymorphism — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <redmine@...>

24 messages 2013/08/11

[#56544] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8774][Open] rb_file_dirname return wrong encoding string when dir is "." — jiayp@... (贾 延平) <jiayp@...>

10 messages 2013/08/11

[#56569] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781][Open] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

31 messages 2013/08/12
[#56582] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <drbrain@...7.net> 2013/08/12

[#56584] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2013/08/12

(2013/08/13 2:25), drbrain (Eric Hodel) wrote:

[#56636] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible — Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...> 2013/08/16

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 07:38:01AM +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:

[#56634] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8788][Open] use eventfd on newer Linux instead of pipe for timer thread — "normalperson (Eric Wong)" <normalperson@...>

11 messages 2013/08/16

[#56648] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8795][Open] "Null byte in string error" on Marshal.load — "mml (McClain Looney)" <m@...>

17 messages 2013/08/16

[#56824] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8823][Open] Run trap handler in an independent thread called "Signal thread" — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

14 messages 2013/08/27

[#56878] [ruby-trunk - misc #8835][Open] Introducing a semantic versioning scheme and branching policy — "knu (Akinori MUSHA)" <knu@...>

11 messages 2013/08/30

[#56890] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8839][Open] Class and module should return the class or module that was opened — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

26 messages 2013/08/30

[#56894] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8840][Open] Yielder#state — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

14 messages 2013/08/30

[ruby-core:56577] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible

From: "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <redmine@...>
Date: 2013-08-12 14:16:27 UTC
List: ruby-core #56577
Issue #8781 has been updated by trans (Thomas Sawyer).


require_relative makes sense for "packages", i.e. where you have a main file that loads a bunch of subordinate files. In other words, the subordinate files could have all been in the main file, but are split out for better organization. So the brittleness you speak of is not an issue here. A much worse brittleness that require_relative helps prevent is when two libraries clobber each other by using the same absolute library path --it shouldn't happen in a well structured project, but people don't always follow the proper conventions.



----------------------------------------
Feature #8781: Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8781#change-41112

Author: ko1 (Koichi Sasada)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: lib
Target version: current: 2.1.0


I wrote a attached small script rrc.rb, stand for "RequireRelativeChecker".

This small script points out that require() can be replaced with require_relative().

"Detecting replace-able require()" algorithm is easy (and not perfect):
(1) If loaded file is at sub (or same) directory of requiring file.
(2) If requiring file foo.rb is at $LOAD_PATH, then check only foo/*.
See attached script for details.

This is a part of output.

####
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/cgi.rb:294: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/cgi/core.rb.
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/cgi.rb:295: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/cgi/cookie.rb.
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/date.rb:4: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/date/format.rb.
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http.rb:1541: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http/exceptions.rb.
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http.rb:1543: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http/header.rb.
/home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http.rb:1545: WARNING: Use require_relative() to require /home/ko1/tmp/trunk/lib/ruby/2.1.0/net/http/generic_request.rb.
###

(all of warnings are attached)

How about to replace require() with require_relative() if it is possible?

Advantage:
* require_relative() is faster than require() especially with many gems.
* Easy to detect which file is loaded.

Disadvantage (incompatibility)
* We can't replace loading file with $LOAD_PATH trick.
(But I believe nobody expect such behavior)

(I also recommend other gem authors to  use require_relative)

Any comments?



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

In This Thread