I am not sure if such a verbose message would make sense, even more so as
long as the ruby user has no trivial way to silence a particular warning
(without e. g. the $VERBOSE trick to assign to a new value, make a change,
then re-assign to the old one).
In general, while you can argue that a more verbose warning can be more
helpful, in ruby it is often the case that warnings are sort of short.
I can not say whether this is deliberate or may be inspired by japanese
devs playing with english and having fun (see zombie threads) :) - but
I believe that, for consistency, it may be better to be short/succinct
if possible. In the long run perhaps ruby may provide more fine-tuned
control over warnings but I think matz has to think about this, perhaps
past ruby 3.0. There is actually quite a lot of ruby that focuses on
the "human side of errors/problems", if you think about it - the did-you-
mean gem too. Rubocop too, if you think about it from an "enforce a
spec for consistency" point of view (e. g. autocorrect option, if it
works, in a ruby project).
I have no particular opinion about the change itself but I think jeremy
has a valid point with reallife problems encountered in this regard (e. g.
the old bug reports).