From: David Masover <ninja@...>
Date: 2011-06-16T06:27:56+09:00
Subject: Re: RFC - One word alias for require_relative

On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 02:55:31 PM Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> On 15 Ιούν, 22:26, Florian Gilcher <f...@andersground.net> wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> > > require_relative 'lib/alter'
> > > require './lib/alter'
> > > 
> > > To my understanding, both should do the same thing.
> > > 
> > > Is this right?
> > 
> > No, the first is relative to the file, the second is relative to
> > "Dir.pwd", the process working directory.
> 
> I understand.
> 
> Thus the first works for the main file, *and* for included files which
> can use again require_relative.
> 
> The second works only for the main file (usually executed from it's
> location).

Not really, no.

More like, the first works wherever I'd normally be hacking around with 
__FILE__ to get a decent require path.

The second doesn't work at all, unless it's actually what you intend. For 
instance, if I add a ruby script to my PATH as a command, and then run it, 
what directory I happen to be in when I run it is what determines what the 
second is relative to.

Even on Windows, the working directory isn't always where the main file is.