Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

load current directory file #3126

Closed
yamam opened this issue Jul 9, 2015 · 13 comments
Closed

load current directory file #3126

yamam opened this issue Jul 9, 2015 · 13 comments

Comments

@yamam
Copy link

yamam commented Jul 9, 2015

jruby 9k rc2 can't load a file in current directory.

$ touch test.rb

# jruby 9k rc2
$ jruby -e 'load "test.rb" ; puts "OK"'
LoadError: no such file to load -- test.rb
   load at org/jruby/RubyKernel.java:958

# jruby 9k rc1
$ jruby -e 'load "test.rb" ; puts "OK"'
OK

# MRI
$ ruby -e 'load "test.rb" ; puts "OK"'
OK
@mkristian
Copy link
Member

oho

$ ruby -v -e 'load "test.rb" ; puts "OK"'
ruby 2.1.5p273 (2014-11-13 revision 48405) [x86_64-linux]
OK

but

$ ruby -v -e 'require "test.rb" ; puts "OK"'
ruby 2.1.5p273 (2014-11-13 revision 48405) [x86_64-linux]
/home/christian/.rbenv/versions/2.1.5/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in
`require': cannot load such file -- test.rb (LoadError)
from
/home/christian/.rbenv/versions/2.1.5/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in
`require'
from -e:1:in `<main>'

the latter is wanted. the first one not working with jruby is a bug.

@headius
Copy link
Member

headius commented Jul 13, 2015

That's weird. I'm not sure why MRI loads from CWD for "load" but not for "require" we need to clarify this behavior with MRI.

@jeremyevans
Copy link
Contributor

This breaks Sequel's specs (and many uses of Sequel migrations). The historical and I believe expected behavior for all ruby versions (and JRuby versions prior to rc2) is for load to directly load the filename given (equivalent to eval File.read(filename)). The reason require behaves differently for relative paths is that it uses $: in that case, which load does not. For similar reasons, require doesn't require specifying file extensions, whereas load requires the full path.

@enebo enebo modified the milestone: JRuby 9.0.0.0 Jul 14, 2015
@donv
Copy link
Member

donv commented Jul 15, 2015

This is a pretty serious bug that is likely to occur in many apps. It currently breaks our Capistrano deployment. Will it force a JRuby 9.0.0.0.rc3 release?

@enebo enebo added this to the JRuby 9.0.0.0 milestone Jul 15, 2015
@enebo
Copy link
Member

enebo commented Jul 15, 2015

@donv @jeremyevans I think we will just make sure both your use cases work and still try for final. So long as we don't realize the semantics are weirder than reported...

@enebo
Copy link
Member

enebo commented Jul 16, 2015

wowsers. The semantics of this are interesting and it reflects yet another hard to believe lack of understanding on my part within one week (to_ary/to_a in masgn being the other -- love random trivia in an issue comment). If I have CWD like this:

a.rb
hoh/a.rb

Invocations of MRI:

# full paths are full paths
mri22 -Ihoh -e 'load "/Users/enebo/work/snippets/a.rb"'   # a.rb loaded
mri22 -Ihoh -e 'load "./a.rb"' # a.rb loaded

# aribtrary named file
mri22 -Ihoh -e 'load "a.rb"'  # hoh/a.rb loaded
mri22 -e 'load "a.rb"' # a.rb loaded

So if if it a qualified path we load that. If it is an unqualified path we try to load from LOAD_PATH and failing that we load from CWD.

@headius
Copy link
Member

headius commented Jul 16, 2015

I believe this logic is in rb_f_load in MRI; it attempts to find the file using load path and typical require semantics, and if that fails it tries to blindly open the filename as-is:

    path = rb_find_file(fname);
    if (!path) {
        if (!rb_file_load_ok(RSTRING_PTR(fname)))
            load_failed(orig_fname);
        path = fname;
    }
    rb_load_internal(path, RTEST(wrap));

Seems simple enough to add to our load logic, yes?

@enebo enebo closed this as completed in 2366376 Jul 16, 2015
@enebo
Copy link
Member

enebo commented Jul 16, 2015

@headius please review this for me. I think it is what we discovered this morning but the actual code and where I injected this potentially could be wrong.

@donv @jeremyevans could I trouble you guys to test HEAD to make sure you see no more problems. This turns out to be not too risky because it comes after normal load semantics and MRI definitely has this additional check so we now line up with it.

@headius
Copy link
Member

headius commented Jul 16, 2015

The fix looks right to me.

@jeremyevans
Copy link
Contributor

I'm currently at an OpenBSD hackathon, and won't be able to test this until mid-next week. I don't ever build JRuby from source, but I suppose I could try jruby-head in RVM in a VM next week and see if it works there.

@donv
Copy link
Member

donv commented Jul 16, 2015

My use case with Capistrano that failed earlier work fine now. 😄 👍

@enebo
Copy link
Member

enebo commented Jul 16, 2015

@jeremyevans I have sequel cloned and I was able to get a full green run doing a 'rake spec' with HEAD. I confirmed it was broken before this fix so I think we are golden.

@anup1710
Copy link

anup1710 commented Feb 25, 2019

@headius
I am getting this error in new Jruby 9.2.6.0 but when I check with old jruby version 1.7.21 I am not getting this error

$ touch test.rb

Jruby 1.7.21

$ jruby -v -e "require 'test.rb' ; puts 'OK'"
jruby 1.7.21 (1.9.3p551) 2015-07-07 a741a82 on Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 1.8.0_45-b15 +jit [Windows 7-amd64]
io/console not supported; tty will not be manipulated
OK

Jruby 9.2.6.0

$ jruby -v -e "require 'test.rb' ; puts 'OK'"
jruby 9.2.6.0 (2.5.3) 2019-02-11 15ba00b Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 25.45-b02 on 1.8.0_45-b15 +jit [mswin32-x86_64]
LoadError: no such file to load -- test
  require at org/jruby/RubyKernel.java:984
  require at C:/JRuby/jruby-9.2.6.0/lib/ruby/stdlib/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:59
   <main> at -e:1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants