[ruby-core:117286] [Ruby master Feature#19117] Include the method owner in backtraces, not just the method name
From:
"Eregon (Benoit Daloze) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date:
2024-03-21 20:08:35 UTC
List:
ruby-core #117286
Issue #19117 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
Assignee changed from Eregon (Benoit Daloze) to mame (Yusuke Endoh)
----------------------------------------
Feature #19117: Include the method owner in backtraces, not just the method name
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19117#change-107412
* Author: byroot (Jean Boussier)
* Status: Closed
* Assignee: mame (Yusuke Endoh)
* 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 -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/
