< :前の番号
^ :番号順リスト
> :次の番号
P :前の記事（スレッド移動）
N :次の記事（スレッド移動）
|<:前のスレッド
>|:次のスレッド
^ :返事先
_:自分への返事
>:同じ返事先を持つ記事（前）
<:同じ返事先を持つ記事（後）
---:分割してスレッド表示、再表示
| :分割して（縦）スレッド表示、再表示
~ :スレッドのフレーム消去
.:インデックス
..:インデックスのインデックス
Issue #17428 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) wrote in #note-8:
> I prefer to decide "what do we want" than "what is easier".
I'm not matz, but what I want for Method#inspect is consistency and a clear rule for formatting.
(https://github.com/oracle/truffleruby/blob/0aeb60024d025e3d3d836bd08ff89479d4292bb7/src/main/ruby/truffleruby/core/truffle/method_operations.rb#L37-L42 seems a good one)
IMHO more special cases just lead to bugs like this, confusion as before #15608, or harder-to-understand output.
Method#inspect doesn't need to be "as nice as possible", I think it needs to be "easy to understand and consistent to help comparison and avoid ambiguity".
I think this is a good example why the behavior of current master with Jeremy's fix is better:
```
$ ruby -e 'p Module.method(:prepend)'
2.7.2, confusing, prepend is not a singleton method
#<Method: Module.prepend(*)>
CRuby master with Jeremy's fix (same on TruffleRuby): clear, simple, consistent
#<Method: #<Class:Module>(Module)#prepend(*)>
the proposals above, IMHO both are unclear and confusing:
#<Method: Module(Module).prepend(*)>
#<Method: Module.(Module#)prepend(*)>
```
----------------------------------------
Bug #17428: Method#inspect bad output for class methods
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17428#change-89510
* Author: marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
* ruby -v: ruby 3.0.0dev (2020-12-22T17:37:59Z master 487355873a) [x86_64-darwin18]
* Backport: 2.5: UNKNOWN, 2.6: UNKNOWN, 2.7: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
```
$ $ ruby -e 'p String.method(:prepend)'
# 2.7.0:
#<Method: String.prepend(*)>
# 3.0.0:
#<Method: #<Class:Object>(Module)#prepend(*)>
```
@jeremyevans found it shows the method as pertaining to one level too high (which is good for objects as we don't want to show the singleton class there, but not for classes).
Probably due to #15608
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>