From: daniel@...42.com Date: 2019-09-09T17:09:08+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:94865] [Ruby master Misc#16157] What is the correct and *portable* way to do generic delegation? Issue #16157 has been updated by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme). I've compiled your delegate-keyword-argument-separation branch to test this. BTW in your example it should be `respond_to?(:pass_positional_hash, true)` The portability result is... Almost there, but not quite. In 2.6 and 2.7, `o.empty?` cannot distinguish between `foo()` and `foo({})`. This results in the discrepancies found below via this test script. ```ruby class ProxyOld < BasicObject def initialize(target) @target = target end def method_missing(*a, &b) @target.send(*a, &b) rescue $! end end class ProxyNew < BasicObject def initialize(target) @target = target end def method_missing(*a, **o, &b) if o.empty? @target.send(*a, &b) else @target.send(*a, **o, &b) end rescue $! end pass_positional_hash(:method_missing) if respond_to?(:pass_positional_hash, true) end class Test def args(*a) a end def arg(a) a end def opts(**o) o end def arg0o(a=nil, **o) [a,o] end def arg1o(a, **o) [a,o] end end e = Object.new def e.write(*args) $stdout.print("warn! ") end $stderr = e opt = {} hash = {k:42} proxy = (ARGV.first=="old" ? ProxyOld : ProxyNew).new(Test.new) p proxy.args(42) p proxy.arg(42) p proxy.arg({k:42}) p proxy.arg({}) p proxy.opts(k: 42) p proxy.arg0o(hash) p proxy.arg0o(hash, **{}) p proxy.arg0o(hash, **opt) ``` I've highlighted the two cases where we have the correct behavior in 3.0 and 2.6 ProxyOld, but not the two others. | testcase | 2.6 ProxyOld | 2.6 ProxyNew | 2.7 ProxyNew | 3.0 ProxyNew | |---------------------------|-----------------|---------------------|---------------------------------|----------------| | proxy.args(42) | [42] | [42] | [42] | [42] | | proxy.arg(42) | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | | proxy.arg({k:42}) | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | | proxy.arg({}) | {} | **error** | **error** | {} | | proxy.opts(k: 42) | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | {:k=>42} | | proxy.arg0o(hash) | [nil, {:k=>42}] | [nil, {:k=>42}] | warn! warn! [nil, {:k=>42}] | [{:k=>42}, {}] | | proxy.arg0o(hash, **{}) | [nil, {:k=>42}] | [nil, {:k=>42}] | warn! warn! [nil, {:k=>42}] | [{:k=>42}, {}] | | proxy.arg0o(hash, **opt) | [{:k=>42}, {}] | **[nil, {:k=>42}]** | **warn! warn! [nil, {:k=>42}]** | [{:k=>42}, {}] | ---------------------------------------- Misc #16157: What is the correct and *portable* way to do generic delegation? https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16157#change-81483 * Author: Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- With the keyword argument changes in 2.7 we must now specify keyword arguments explicitly when doing generic delegation. But this change is not compatible with 2.6, where it adds an empty hash to the argument list of methods that do not need/accept keyword arguments. To illustrate the problem: ```ruby class ProxyWithoutKW < BasicObject def initialize(target) @target = target end def method_missing(*a, &b) @target.send(*a, &b) end end class ProxyWithKW < BasicObject def initialize(target) @target = target end def method_missing(*a, **o, &b) @target.send(*a, **o, &b) end end class Test def args(*a) a end def arg(a) a end def opts(**o) o end end # 2.6 2.7 3.0 ProxyWithoutKW.new(Test.new).args(42) # [42] [42] [42] ok ProxyWithoutKW.new(Test.new).arg(42) # 42 42 42 ok ProxyWithoutKW.new(Test.new).opts(k: 42) # {:k=>42} {:k=>42} +warn [{:k=>42}] incompatible with >= 2.7 ProxyWithKW.new(Test.new).args(42) # [42, {}] [42] [42] incompatible with <= 2.6 ProxyWithKW.new(Test.new).arg(42) # error 42 42 incompatible with <= 2.6 ProxyWithKW.new(Test.new).opts(k: 42) # {:k=>42} {:k=>42} +warn {:k=>42} must ignore warning? cannot use pass_positional_hash in 2.6 ``` I don't know how to solve this, so I'm asking for the **official** correct way to write portable delegation code. And by **portable** I mean code that can be used in gems that target ruby 2.6 and above. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: