[ruby-core:116729] [Ruby master Feature#19117] Include the method owner in backtraces, not just the method name
From:
"matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date:
2024-02-14 05:10:26 UTC
List:
ruby-core #116729
Issue #19117 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto).
I am OK with adding method owner. I am against removing quote signs.
Matz.
----------------------------------------
Feature #19117: Include the method owner in backtraces, not just the method name
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19117#change-106748
* Author: byroot (Jean Boussier)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Target version: 3.4
----------------------------------------
```
module Foo
class Bar
def inspect
1 + '1'
end
end
end
p Foo::Bar.new
```
This code produce the following backtrace:
```
/tmp/foo.rb:4:in `+': String can't be coerced into Integer (TypeError)
from /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `inspect'
from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `p'
from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `<main>'
```
This works, but on large codebases and large backtraces the method name isn't always all that revealing, most of the time you need to open many of the locations listed in the backtrace to really understand what is going on.
I propose that we also include the owner name:
```
/tmp/foo.rb:4:in `Integer#+': String can't be coerced into Integer (TypeError)
from /tmp/foo.rb:4:in `Foo::Bar#inspect'
from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `Kernel#p'
from /tmp/foo.rb:9:in `<main>'
```
I believe that in many case it would allow to much better understand the backtrace without having to jump back and forth between it and the source code.
This is inspired by @ivoanjo 's `backtracie` gem: https://github.com/ivoanjo/backtracie
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
______________________________________________
ruby-core mailing list -- ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-core-leave@ml.ruby-lang.org
ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/