Bug #3422: Object.const_get(:A, false) can access BasicObject::A

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)
• Target version: 2.0.0
• ruby -v: -

[judofyr (Magnus Holm)]

=begin
From the documentation of Module#const_get(sym, inherit=true):

If the constant is not defined or is defined by the ancestors and inherit is false, NameError will be raised.

Yet, this works fine:

BasicObject::A = 1
Object.const_get(:A, false) # => 1

While I haven't tested it, I believe the attached patch should fix the issue.
=end

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Status changed from Open to Assigned
• Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version set to 1.9.3

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

the patch should be applied before 1.9.3.

matz.

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

Sorry, this issue must be covered by #3423.

matz.

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed
• % Done changed from 0 to 100

This issue was solved with changeset r32283.
Magnus, thank you for reporting this issue.
Your contribution to Ruby is greatly appreciated.
May Ruby be with you.

---

• variable.c (rb_const_get_0): should not look for superclasses if
  the second optional argument is given for #const_get().
  fix [Bug #3422] [Bug #3423]

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Status changed from Closed to Assigned
• Priority changed from 3 to Normal

r32283 breaks following codes:

module LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
end
include LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end #=> NameError: uninitialized constant LangModuleTop

class BasicObject
end #=> NameError: uninitialized constant BasicObject

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed

Yui NARUSE wrote:

r32283 breaks following codes:

Oops, r32342 fix this. thanks!

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Status changed from Closed to Assigned

Following code still doesn't work:

module LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
end
include LangModuleSpecInObject
p LangModuleTop
end
p LangModuleSpecInObject::LangModuleTop == LangModuleTop #=> false (it should be true)

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

Can you elaborate?

If I remove "end" in the line 7, it works for me (otherwise, it was an syntax error).

matz.

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

Oh sorry, it must be:

module LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
end
include LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
p LangModuleSpecInObject::LangModuleTop == LangModuleTop

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

Oh sorry, it must be:

module LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
end
include LangModuleSpecInObject
module LangModuleTop
end
p LangModuleSpecInObject::LangModuleTop == LangModuleTop

matz, could you please answer to Yui?

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

Matz, I think we need to decide either 1) revert r32283 or 2) fix naruse reported regression. Everybody know you are busy. But I believe 1.9.3 have no regression.....

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed

[judofyr (Magnus Holm)]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 04:57, Nobuyoshi Nakada [e-mail] wrote:

Issue #3422 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.

Status changed from Assigned to Closed

Why is this issue closed? Is the current behaviour acceptable?

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

• ruby -v changed from ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-05-31 revision 28117) [x86_64-darwin10.3.0] to -

Why is this issue closed? Is the current behaviour acceptable?

Can you still reproduce this issue?

[judofyr (Magnus Holm)]

Why is this issue closed? Is the current behaviour acceptable?

Can you still reproduce this issue?

Not the original issue. But it seemed to me that this issue was left
open because it introduced other problems (discussed above). Now that
this one has closed, I'm wondering what happened to this new issue?

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• ruby -v changed from - to ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-05-31 revision 28117) [x86_64-darwin10.3.0]

nobu lazily closed this ticket without the revision reference: r33163.

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

• ruby -v changed from ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-05-31 revision 28117) [x86_64-darwin10.3.0] to -

Why is this issue closed? Is the current behaviour acceptable?

Can you still reproduce this issue?

Not the original issue. But it seemed to me that this issue was left
open because it introduced other problems (discussed above). Now that
this one has closed, I'm wondering what happened to this new issue?

As Yui explained, nobu fixed and commited it into ruby_1_9_3 branch. so
I'm not thinking the regression above discussed disappeared. If you run
latest ruby_1_9_3 branch and find any issue, please let us know asap.

Thank you for paying attention our bugfixes effort.

[aef (Alexander E. Fischer)]

Could the following problem be related to this change? "Including namespace module through RSpec config in Ruby 1.9.3":http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13042298/including-namespace-module-through-rspec-config-in-ruby-1-9-3

If so, wouldn't it be a better idea to revert this?

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

• Status changed from Closed to Open

[mame (Yusuke Endoh)]

• Status changed from Open to Assigned
• Target version changed from 1.9.3 to 2.0.0

Matz, do you think that it should be changed again?
IMO, in principle, I don't think that it is a good idea to change the behavior so many times.

--
Yusuke Endoh [e-mail]

[shugo (Shugo Maeda)]

• Assignee changed from matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) to kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)

mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote:

Matz, do you think that it should be changed again?
IMO, in principle, I don't think that it is a good idea to change the behavior so many times.

I'm not sure why this ticket has been reopened, but if it's because of the following comment, this ticket can be closed, because the request has already been rejected in #7213.

Could the following problem be related to this change? "Including namespace module through RSpec config in Ruby 1.9.3":http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13042298/including-namespace-module-through-rspec-config-in-ruby-1-9-3

If so, wouldn't it be a better idea to revert this?

Kosaki-san, why did you reopen this ticket?

[kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed

Kosaki-san, why did you reopen this ticket?

Sorry, my memory was lost and I don't remember why. but I suspect your guess is right and we can close this ticket.