Issue #10561 has been updated by Yorick Peterse. It's fine for the methods to do different things, the naming however is a bit confusing. Using `path` doesn't clearly state when it's absolute and when it's relative. Perhaps `script_path` would make more sense. Merging the two is also fine, although it could potentially break code depending on the current behaviour of `path`, thus it would have to be done with some care. ---------------------------------------- Bug #10561: Improve function of Thread::Backtrace::Location #path and #absolute_path https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10561#change-51606 * Author: Sam Saffron * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * ruby -v: 2.2.0 * Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- I was working on this issue in Rails and hit an area where Backtrace Location can be improved https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/17782 1. It is undefined in the documentation how #absolute_path should operate when #path is invalid (in case of instance eval) 2. There are a few conditions where #path and #absolute_path can return nil, this forces extra protection code when parsing paths to check for nil. (for example getting filename) Suggestions: 1. Instead of returning Qnil from location_path and location_absolute_path on invalid conditions, return the string "(unknown)" which is easier to parse and sticks out better in a big backtrace. There is precedent here with the string "(eval)" 2. If path is invalid have absolute_path return "(unknown)", define that in the documentation 3. (possible) add an additional method on caller_location called #filename so people stop parsing filename from #path and #absolute_path 4. Evaluate if it makes sense to have #path and #absolute_path in the API as both methods can return full paths so the semantic difference is subtle. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/