Feature #6210: load should provide a way to specify the top-level module

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version: -

[now (Nikolai Weibull)]

load currently takes an optional second argument that allows you to load into an anonymous and new top-level Module. It would be nice if the second argument could also be a Module that would then be used as the top-level Module. That way one could provide a set of methods that should be available to the content being loaded without having to put them in Kernel.

[luislavena (Luis Lavena)]

• Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version set to 2.0.0

Sounds partially like #5643?

[mame (Yusuke Endoh)]

• Status changed from Open to Assigned

[ko1 (Koichi Sasada)]

• Target version changed from 2.0.0 to 2.6

I changed target to next minor because no discussion on it.

[naruse (Yui NARUSE)]

• Target version deleted (2.6)

[jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans)]

I think this is a useful feature, and it can be implemented without any API changes/backwards compatibility issues. I submitted a pull request for it: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/4986

[byroot (Jean Boussier)]

Agreed, it could be used to experiment with new ways to load code in a non global manner.

That being said it would entirely sidestep iseq caching. Not that it's a deal breaker, but if this were to be used for loading lots of code, we might also need RubyVM::InstructionSequence#eval(wrapping_module)

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

OK, I (finally) accepted the proposal. Go ahead.

Matz.

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed

Applied in changeset git|b35b7a1ef25347735a6bb7c28ab7e77afea1d856.

---

Allow Kernel#load to load code into a specified module

Instead of always using a new anonymous module for Kernel#load if
the wrap argument is not false/nil, use the given module if a module
is provided.

Implements [Feature #6210]

[byroot (Jean Boussier)]

What about the RubyVM::InstructionSequence was there any discussion to allow caching Kernel.load(path, module_instance)?

[jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans)]

byroot (Jean Boussier) wrote in #note-9:

What about the RubyVM::InstructionSequence was there any discussion to allow caching Kernel.load(path, module_instance)?

The dev meeting log does not indicate this was discussed. If you think it's important, can you add it as a new feature request?