Project

General

Profile

Feature #16142

Implement code_range in Proc and Method

Added by okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA) about 2 months ago. Updated 5 days ago.

Status:
Open
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
-
Target version:
-
[ruby-dev:50845]

Description

Abstract

Add a new method code_range as an alternative to source_location to Proc and Method

Background

I'd like to get a body from a Proc in TraceLocation gem (https://github.com/yhirano55/trace_location), in order to add what's executed to the output. There's no way to do that in current Ruby implementation, so as an alternative, I considered getting source code location of a Proc.

Proposal

I propose that Proc#code_range and Method#code_range. Other names can work as well, for example Proc#source_region. It returns an array containing filename as a first argument and position information as a second array. For example:
a_proc.position # => [(irb), [1, 5, 3, 25]]

Implementation

I've implemented a simpler version of this, see gist for more details.

https://gist.github.com/okuramasafumi/ac90bbf04a1c13b7d67954c9c5e62553

Notice I use code_location from iseq struct.

Discussion

One might say that we can simply add columns and end position to Proc#source_location. However, this can easily brake existing apps such as Pry.
It's also possible that we add additional keyword argument to Proc#source_location, for instance:
a_proc.source_location(including_range: true)
This change can also break existing apps since in old Rubies this keyword argument cannot be accepted.
Therefore, adding a new method is better in terms of backward compatibility. It might be better at readability as well.

Summary

I propose an API to get code position of Proc and Method so that we can get body of them (especially of a Proc).

History

Updated by osyo (manga osyo) 6 days ago

hi.
I want to use it when I want to get the block source code.
e.g. https://github.com/osyo-manga/gem-binding-debug
https://github.com/osyo-manga/gem-binding-debug/blob/a5e19728893ddb92ec04170fcd8afbdf43db2eab/lib/binding/debug.rb#L104-L107

I think it would be nice to add a new method :)
Also, the value is different between iseq code_location and Proc#code_location .
So it ’s better to use a name different from #code_location .
(e.g. #source_region ?

MEMO

Output example when using https://gist.github.com/okuramasafumi/ac90bbf04a1c13b7d67954c9c5e62553.

# in test.rb
expr = proc {
  puts "hoge"
  puts "foo"
  puts "bar"
}

# Return [path, beg_pos.lineno, beg_pos.column, end_pos.lineno, end_pos.column]
p expr.code_location
# => ["./test.rb", 2, 12, 6, 1]

Example using RubyVM::InstructionSequence

# in test.rb
expr = proc {
  puts "hoge"
  puts "foo"
  puts "bar"
}

iseq = RubyVM::InstructionSequence.of(expr)
path = iseq.to_a[6]
code_location = iseq.to_a[4][:code_location]

p [path, *code_location]
# => ["./test.rb", 2, 12, 6, 1]

Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) 5 days ago

Just a note: "code range" is an implementation-level concept for Strings. For instance there is CR_7BIT which means all characters are < 128.
So I would recommend another method name than code_range, as I think that will be confusing.

IMHO the name should be very similar to source_location since it is highly related.

I think we should just extend source_location and fix the few existing usages that might be problematic.
Detecting whether the method takes keywords should be easy either by trying and rescuing ArgumentError, or using UnboundMethod#arity.

Also available in: Atom PDF