[#92063] [Ruby trunk Misc#15723] Reconsider numbered parameters — zverok.offline@...
Issue #15723 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev).
3 messages
2019/03/31
[ruby-core:92023] [Ruby trunk Bug#15732] Strict mode
From:
merch-redmine@...
Date:
2019-03-27 23:04:54 UTC
List:
ruby-core #92023
Issue #15732 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).
localhostdotdev (localhost .dev) wrote:
> A lot of issues could be easily prevented with a strict mode, for instance:
>
> - Passing a block to a method that doesn't accept blocks could raise an exception, e.g. methods would be required to explicitly ask for a block (def a(..., &block))
This is being discussed in #15554.
> - $1, $2, etc. variables when matching with a regex would not be created
Not sure why these would be an issue (performance?). You can use `String#match?` if you want to avoid it.
> - Could throw error when re-assigning constant
There is already a warning for this, is there a reason it would need to be an error? You can already turn it into an error:
```ruby
def Warning.warn(s)
raise s if s.match?(/: warning: already initialized constant /)
super
end
```
> And maybe more controversial:
>
> - Using reversed keywords as argument names
Already a SyntaxError, assuming you meant method argument name:
```ruby
def x(begin)
end
```
Maybe you meant method name and not method argument name? Sometimes the method name that makes the most sense is a reserved keyword. Considering that there are core ruby classes that do this (`Range#begin`, `Range#end`), I'm not sure how this would work.
> - Using method name as argument name
Such as this?:
```ruby
def foo(foo)
foo
end
```
I don't see this pattern used much, but it doesn't seem to cause a problem. Any reason why you would want to disallow argument names that are the same, but not local variables that are the same?:
```ruby
def foo(bar)
foo = bar
foo
end
```
> - Using ambitious class/constant/method names (e.g. `class A; end; class B; class A; def me; A; end; end`
I'm guessing you meant ambiguous? This actually isn't ambiguous, you just need to know how constant lookup is preformed.
> I'm sure there is more, using things rubocop does for instance: https://github.com/rubocop-hq/rubocop/blob/master/manual/cops.md
>
> I could be implemented as a magic header, e.g. `# strict_mode: true`.
This proposed collection of behavior changes added by a strict mode seems mostly arbitrary to me. And I don't think we want to add more magic headers if we can avoid it. Some of these things happen at run time and not parse time, and a magic header doesn't work well for that. For example:
a.rb:
```
# strict_mode: true
class B
class A
def me
A
end
end
end
```
b.rb:
```
require_relative 'a'
A = B
A::A.me{|x| x}
```
Does this trigger an error for "ambiguous" constants, even though file `b.rb` doesn't use strict mode and when `a.rb` was parsed, the constant wasn't "ambiguous"? How about for passing a block to the `me` method that doesn't accept a block?
----------------------------------------
Bug #15732: Strict mode
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15732#change-77348
* Author: localhostdotdev (localhost .dev)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* Target version:
* ruby -v:
* Backport: 2.4: UNKNOWN, 2.5: UNKNOWN, 2.6: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
A lot of issues could be easily prevented with a strict mode, for instance:
- Passing a block to a method that doesn't accept blocks could raise an exception, e.g. methods would be required to explicitly ask for a block (def a(..., &block))
- $1, $2, etc. variables when matching with a regex would not be created
- Could throw error when re-assigning constant
And maybe more controversial:
- Using reversed keywords as argument names
- Using method name as argument name
- Using ambitious class/constant/method names (e.g. `class A; end; class B; class A; def me; A; end; end`
I'm sure there is more, using things rubocop does for instance: https://github.com/rubocop-hq/rubocop/blob/master/manual/cops.md
I could be implemented as a magic header, e.g. `# strict_mode: true`.
This is obviously a similar idea from Javascript's strict mode: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Strict_mode
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>