Bug #15206

require_relative in std_lib

Added by marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) almost 2 years ago. Updated almost 2 years ago.

Target version:


I noticed that there are some require for internal files in lib/. Ideally, they would be using require_relative instead. This is faster and more explicit.

Note: require_relative had a potential issue with symlinks that was fixed in 2.5, so libraries that might be loaded from earlier Ruby, like rubygems, can not yet be updated.

I've created a PR and would like to know if there are comments / objections / things I'm missing.

Related issues

Is duplicate of Ruby master - Feature #8781: Use require_relative() instead of require() if possibleClosedActions

Updated by MSP-Greg (Greg L) almost 2 years ago

The Appveyor run on the PR passed.

Appveyor testing has been intermittently failing. With parallel/multi testing (test-all and/or test-spec), there can be a lot more files being checked and possibly loaded. Considering more than one CI VM may be exist on a system, and they may share drives, anything that lowers disk I/O is good.


Updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) almost 2 years ago

  • Is duplicate of Feature #8781: Use require_relative() instead of require() if possible added

Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) almost 2 years ago

  • Status changed from Open to Closed

Applied in changeset trunk|r65511.

lib/cgi/util.rb: use require

  • lib/cgi/util.rb: reverted r65505. require_relative does not work for cgi/, as extension libraries are placed in other directories than ruby libraries. [Bug #15206]

Updated by stomar (Marcus Stollsteimer) almost 2 years ago

For lib/racc/parser.rb I reverted this in r65514 for the require of racc/ (similar to r65511 for cgi/escape).

Possibly there might be other C extensions that are required from within /lib, where require_relative would not work?

(I only had a quick look into /lib and /ext, and racc was an obvious other case, besides cgi, where this problem might occur.)

PS. The LoadError for racc/cparse is not that obvious because it is rescued and there is a Ruby fallback.

Updated by marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) almost 2 years ago

Oh, good catch, I should have thought of that...

I modified my script to check if the path with .rb actually exists and it came back with only these two exceptions.

Updated by znz (Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA) almost 2 years ago

I revert examples in comment and replace numeric features too at r65548.

Also available in: Atom PDF