07.02.2012 05:59, Trans §á§Ú§ê§Ö§ä:
> I recently benchmarked require vs require_relative, and I was
> surprised to see no noticeable difference between the two. This
> doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me since relative require
> shouldn't have to look anything up via RubyGems or the $LOAD_PATH, so
> there should be some appreciable difference, even if relatively small.
>
> So what am I missing? Is the implementation not optimized? Or is there
> something that has to happen behind the scenes that voids any load
> time gain? Or were my benchmarks anomalous for some reason?
>
> Note: My benchmarks were simple timing how long it takes to load the
> test-unit library, which has approx 20 or so files to load, vs the
> same library with all the requires changed to relative requires. Both
> averaged around 0.075 seconds.

Someone told me that my patches are not needed cause of `require_relative`.

Could you test with my patches?

Against trunk:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/66 ( 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5427 )
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/68 ( 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5767 )

Against 1.9.3-p0 :
https://gist.github.com/1484985
( or https://gist.github.com/1688857 - combined with other my patches )

Yura.