Bug #19779: `eval "return"` at top level raises `LocalJumpError`

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: -
• Target version: -
• ruby -v: 3.2.1
• Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN

[andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin)]

Wondering whether it's intentional behaviour. It seems it's the only difference I've noticed between calling return with and without eval:

ruby -e 'return'
ruby -e 'eval "return"'
(eval):1:in `<main>': unexpected return (LocalJumpError)
	from -e:1:in `eval'
	from -e:1:in `<main>'

[andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin)]

• ruby -v set to 3.2.1

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

Since we allow top-level return (from 2.4), it is nice to allow this too. But to be frank, it is low priority.

Matz.

[jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans)]

I submitted a pull request to fix this: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8766

[mame (Yusuke Endoh)]

@jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) Matz said go ahead in today's dev meeting.

• Status changed from Open to Closed

Applied in changeset git|3a88de3ca73052809f5c0bfb4ef8cd435b29ae5f.

---

Support eval "return" at toplevel

Since Ruby 2.4, return is supported at toplevel. This makes eval "return"
also supported at toplevel.

This mostly uses the same tests as direct return at toplevel, with a couple
differences:

END {return if false} is a SyntaxError, but END {eval "return" if false}
is not an error since the eval is never executed. END {return} is a
SyntaxError, but END {eval "return"} is a LocalJumpError.

The following is a SyntaxError:

class X
nil&defined?0--begin e=no_method_error(); return; 0;end
end

However, the following is not, because the eval is never executed:

class X
nil&defined?0--begin e=no_method_error(); eval "return"; 0;end
end

Fixes [Bug #19779]