[ruby-dev:50850] [Ruby master Feature#16142] Implement code_range in Proc and Method

[eregontp@gmail•com]

Issue #16142 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).


Just a note: "code range" is an implementation-level concept for Strings. For instance there is CR_7BIT which means all characters are < 128.
So I would recommend another method name than `code_range`, as I think that will be confusing.

IMHO the name should be very similar to `source_location` since it is highly related.

I think we should just extend `source_location` and fix the few existing usages that might be problematic.
Detecting whether the method takes keywords should be easy either by trying and rescuing ArgumentError, or using UnboundMethod#arity.

----------------------------------------
Feature #16142: Implement code_range in Proc and Method
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16142#change-82177

* Author: okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
# Abstract

Add a new method `code_range` as an alternative to `source_location` to Proc and Method

# Background

I'd like to get a body from a Proc in TraceLocation gem (https://github.com/yhirano55/trace_location), in order to add what's executed to the output. There's no way to do that in current Ruby implementation, so as an alternative, I considered getting source code location of a Proc.

# Proposal

I propose that `Proc#code_range` and `Method#code_range`. Other names can work as well, for example `Proc#source_region`. It returns an array containing filename as a first argument and position information as a second array. For example:
`a_proc.position # => [(irb), [1, 5, 3, 25]]`

# Implementation

I've implemented a simpler version of this, see gist for more details.

https://gist.github.com/okuramasafumi/ac90bbf04a1c13b7d67954c9c5e62553

Notice I use `code_location` from iseq struct.

# Discussion

One might say that we can simply add columns and end position to Proc#source_location. However, this can easily brake existing apps such as Pry.
It's also possible that we add additional keyword argument to `Proc#source_location`, for instance:
`a_proc.source_location(including_range: true)`
This change can also break existing apps since in old Rubies this keyword argument cannot be accepted.
Therefore, adding a new method is better in terms of backward compatibility. It might be better at readability as well.

# Summary

I propose an API to get code position of Proc and Method so that we can get body of them (especially of a Proc).



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/