Bug #2476
closedinstance_eval ArgumentError
Description
=begin
Hi,
I believe I've found an edge case referencing the recent (Dec 4) changes of instance_eval etc. compatibility with current MRI 1.8 behavior.
Ruby backtrace and context :
https://gist.github.com/1be3d65c1ff8c23ce964 ( from sinatra trunk )
C function call :
http://github.com/methodmissing/ruby/blob/trunk/vm_insnhelper.c#L716
Version ruby 1.9.2dev (2009-12-03 trunk 25980 doesn't reproduce.
- Lourens
=end
Updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda) about 15 years ago
=begin
Hi,
2009/12/14 Lourens Naudé redmine@ruby-lang.org:
I believe I've found an edge case referencing the recent (Dec 4) changes of instance_eval etc. compatibility with current MRI 1.8 behavior.
Ruby backtrace and context :
https://gist.github.com/1be3d65c1ff8c23ce964 ( from sinatra trunk )C function call :
http://github.com/methodmissing/ruby/blob/trunk/vm_insnhelper.c#L716
I don't know sinatra well, but it passes a Proc object created by
lambda which doesn't take any arguments to instance_eval, doesn't it?
If so, please use Proc.new or proc instead of lambda.
instance_eval yields the receiver in both 1.8 and 1.9.
Unfortunately, a Proc object created by lambda raises ArgumentError
when extra arguments are yielded in 1.9.
defiant:~$ ruby-1_8 -ve 'lambda {}.call("foo")'
ruby 1.8.8dev (2009-12-05 revision 26022) [i686-linux]
defiant:~$ ruby-trunk -ve 'lambda {}.call("foo")'
ruby 1.9.2dev (2009-12-09 trunk 26052) [i686-linux]
-e:1:in call': wrong number of arguments (1 for 0) (ArgumentError) from -e:1:in
'
You should use Proc.new or proc instead of lambda if you don't want
checks for the number of arguments.
--
Shugo Maeda
=end
Updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda) almost 15 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Third Party's Issue
=begin
If you still think that this issue is a bug of Ruby, please reopen this ticket.
=end