Backport #146
closedIncorrect line numbers in "caller" output when evaluated in a Proc binding
Description
=begin
The second frame's line number appears to always be incorrect when a Proc is created via a non-toplevel method call.
This small program and its output illustrate the issue:
def first # line 1 of proc_caller.rb on my system
second
end
def second
b = third do
1 + 1
end
return b
end
def third(&b)
return b
end
eval("p caller(0)", first)
Output on recent 1.8 releases, including 1.8.6 and 1.8.7:
["proc_caller.rb:6:in second'", "proc_caller.rb:6:in
first'", "proc_caller.rb:16"]
Output that I would expect: (line 6 is in 'second', not 'first')
["proc_caller.rb:6:in second'", "proc_caller.rb:2:in
first'", "proc_caller.rb:16"]
=end
Updated by wilson (Wilson Bilkovich) about 16 years ago
=begin
Everybody agrees that this is a bug, right?
=end
Updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) almost 16 years ago
- Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
=begin
=end
Updated by runpaint (Run Paint Run Run) over 15 years ago
=begin
On 1.9 trunk:
["(eval):1:in `second'", "/tmp/proc_caller.rb:16:in `eval'", "/tmp/proc_caller.rb:16:in `<main>'"]
(I'm trying to understand the changes in caller
output between 1.8 and 1.9 and failing).
=end
Updated by marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) about 15 years ago
- Category set to core
- ruby -v set to -
=begin
The expected output should be the same for
eval("p caller(0)", first.binding)
and
eval("p caller(0)", second.binding)
since the block has the same binding (i.e. that of second).
At the moment "p caller" is evaluated, both first and second have returned, so the output should not contain "proc_caller.rb:6". In neither case should we expect to see "proc_caller.rb:2:in `first'" in the backtrace.
It appears that when a block is captured (here by third), the binding is set the the full stack instead of just that of second. This leads to a longer backtrace, as seen with the output of caller or if an exception is raised in the eval.
Just to confirm that this bug is not present in Ruby 1.9; the output is quite sensible and the same from both first.binding and second.binding.
=end
Updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) about 14 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Assigned
=begin
=end
Updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) over 5 years ago
- Tracker changed from Bug to Backport
- Project changed from Ruby 1.8 to Backport187
- Description updated (diff)
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
- ruby -v deleted (
-)