From: Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
Date: 2013-08-17T09:10:26-03:00
Subject: [ruby-core:56687] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8781] Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible

Em 17-08-2013 01:16, Aaron Patterson escreveu:
> ...
>> I don't really think using require to allow such hacks is a good
>> enough reason to favor require instead of require_relative... After
>> all, Ruby already allows you to override code by monkey patching.
>> Why would you need to override a full file?
> Simply requiring a file will execute code.  There are times (especially
> in tests) where you do not want ANY of the code to be executed (maybe it
> connects to a database, or network, etc).

Now I finally understand how people are using this trick. I believe this 
is mostly used for mocking domain classes (Rails models, for instance) 
when using ActiveRecord or Sequel, given their metaprogramming tricks on 
initialization to fetch the tables meta-data.

But I don't see how this ticket would affect such environments. If I 
understand correctly, what Koichi proposed is to replace require with 
require_relative on Ruby stdlibs and core classes only. Do you see any 
reason you'd like to execute those files? I believe they won't touch any 
database or network so they shouldn't slow down any tests, right?

Cheers,
Rodrigo.