Misc #17199
openid outputed by inspect and to_s output does not allow to find actual object_id and vice-versa
Description
Hello, here is my first ruby issue sorry in advance if it is incorrectly filled.
Issue¶
The value returned by #object_id
is not aligned anymore with displayed info in #inspect
and #to_s
methods.
with ruby < 2.7¶
Object.new.tap { |o| p "#to_s=#{o.to_s}, #inspect=#{o.inspect}, #__id__=#{o.__id__}, shifted_id=#{(o.__id__ << 1).to_s(16)}" }
"#to_s=#<Object:0x0000000000d202a8>, #inspect=#<Object:0x0000000000d202a8>, #__id__=6881620, shifted_id=d202a8"
with ruby >= 2.7¶
Object.new.tap { |o| p "#to_s=#{o.to_s}, #inspect=#{o.inspect}, #__id__=#{o.__id__}, shifted_id=#{(o.__id__ << 1).to
s(16)}" }
"#to_s=#<Object:0x0000555dc8640b88>, #inspect=#<Object:0x0000555dc8640b88>, #__id__=220, shifted_id=1b8"
Consequences¶
It makes harder:
- to implement a clean override of the
#inspect
method. i.e. How to keep the same output without ability to compute to the same "object_id" value. - to debug the object using the inspect output. i.e.
ObjectSpace._id2ref(id_from_inspect >> 1)
used to work, now it doesn't (RangeError: <xXx> is not id value
).
Suggestion¶
IMHO either:
- the
#to_s
and#inspect
documentation are obsoleteThe default [...] [shows|prints] [...] an encoding of the object id
and the change could have been a bit more advertised - they should use the result of
#object_id
instead of displaying the object pointer address
Another solution could be to provide a method to get access to the address, but I'm not sure you want that.
P.S. While debugging my problem I found this ruby-forum thread where people dived a bit more than me into ruby's code.
Files
Updated by chrisseaton (Chris Seaton) almost 4 years ago
Additional context is that #object_id
used to use the object's address, and is now a simple incrementing number, and #inspect
still and has always used the object's address.
I believe the documentation is correct though?
https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.7.2/Object.html#method-i-inspect
Note that an additional complicating issue is that Ruby objects may now move, so addresses are not stable, and so the result of #inspect
is not stable. Two calls to #inspect
on the same object can return different values non-deterministically. Is that what we want?
I think that #inspect
should be changed to use #object_id
.
Updated by jorel (Joel Johnson) almost 4 years ago
Similarly, the object_id
and object addresses are potentially problematic when making use of ObjectSpace.trace_object_allocations_start
and dumping the json data periodically in trying to match up the object over time if GC.compact
has happened.
I think this highlights having object_id
being a nice higher level concept for these use cases instead of relying on the address that is effectively an implementation detail.
Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) almost 4 years ago
Agreed on showing the #object_id
in #inspect
seems better (and more useful for identifying a specific object).
Annih (Baptiste Courtois) wrote:
It makes harder:
- to implement a clean override of the
#inspect
method. i.e. How to keep the same output without ability to compute to the same "object_id" value.
A simple way is "#{super[0...-1]} extra info>"
.
Trying to manually format the object_id
is often not a good idea, notably because object_id
can be negative (especially on 32-bit platforms).
Updated by nateberkopec (Nate Berkopec) almost 4 years ago
This looks like an oversight to me? I agree with Benoit - showing object_id everywhere we used to show address seems the best way forward.
Updated by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson) almost 4 years ago
- File 0001-Use-the-object-id-in-the-default-implementation-of-i.patch 0001-Use-the-object-id-in-the-default-implementation-of-i.patch added
I think adding the object id to inspect
is a good idea, though I think it should just have the object id, not object_id >> 1
(or any other permutation). I don't think adding the object id to heap dumps is a good idea though since we would have to generate an object id for every object in the heap.
I've attached a patch with the object id in inspect
Updated by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson) almost 4 years ago
Another solution could be to provide a method to get access to the address, but I'm not sure you want that.
btw you can get the address of an object like this:
irb(main):001:0> require "fiddle"
=> true
irb(main):002:0> x = Object.new
=> #<Object:0x00007fee918e0148>
irb(main):003:0> Fiddle.dlwrap(x).to_s(16)
=> "7fee918e0148"
irb(main):004:0>