Bug #15597: syscall not returning true from private_method_defined?

• Status: Rejected
• Assignee: -
• Target version: -
• Backport: 2.4: UNKNOWN, 2.5: UNKNOWN, 2.6: UNKNOWN

[AaronLasseigne (Aaron Lasseigne)]

syscode is a private method on Object but when checked with private_method_defined? it returns false.

Ruby 2.6.1

irb(main):001:0> Object.new.private_methods.sort.select { |pm| !Object.private_method_defined?(pm) }
=> [:syscall]

Ruby 2.5.3

irb(main):001:0> Object.new.private_methods.sort.select { |pm| !Object.private_method_defined?(pm) }
=> []

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Related to Feature #14944: Support optional inherit argument for Module#method_defined? added

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Status changed from Open to Feedback

What is your OS?
Doesn't syscall method always raise a NotImplementedError?

[AaronLasseigne (Aaron Lasseigne)]

I'm on MacOS 10.14.3 and yes it does raise a NotImplementedError. Even so, shouldn't it be shown as a private method?

[Hanmac (Hans Mackowiak)]

@nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) : this commit changed it

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/67d87b192b23a75092280b534570580df0f8f7a5

specially this line:

if (me->def->type == VM_METHOD_TYPE_NOTIMPLEMENTED) return METHOD_VISI_UNDEF;

means for each not implemented method, the visibility is undef, and the checks does fail

another question would be if #private_methods should return such not implemented methods?

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Status changed from Feedback to Rejected

It's same as that respond_to?(:syscall, true) returns false.

[Hanmac (Hans Mackowiak)]

@nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) should we change what the #methods returns? or is that to much work?