From: "jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans)" <noreply@...>
Date: 2022-01-14T00:56:28+00:00
Subject: [ruby-core:107107] [Ruby master Bug#18435] Calling `protected` on ancestor method changes result of `instance_methods(false)`

Issue #18435 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).


I've pushed a simpler fix that doesn't change the semantics of `method`, but still returns the correct visibility for ZSUPER methods, by storing the correct visibility as a member of struct METHOD: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/5356/commits/8fd730db1d414f61f42cfb75b8e8711347b1d032

It may be worth discussing whether to change the semantics of ZSUPER Method objects (such as who the `owner` should be), but for right now, it's probably best to just fix the bug.

----------------------------------------
Bug #18435: Calling `protected` on ancestor method changes result of `instance_methods(false)`
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18435#change-95953

* Author: ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* ruby -v: ruby 2.7.5p203 (2021-11-24 revision f69aeb8314) [x86_64-darwin20]
* Backport: 2.6: UNKNOWN, 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
As documented `instance_methods(false)` works as follows:

```ruby
module A
  def method1()  end
end

class B
  include A

  def method2()  end
end

p B.instance_methods(false) #=> [:method2]
```

However, calling `protected` on the method defined by `A`, unexpectedly changes the result of `instance_methods(false)` on `B`, even though the owner of the method is still `A`:
```ruby
module A
  def method1()  end
end

class B
  include A

  protected :method1

  def method2()  end
end

p B.instance_methods(false) #=> [:method1, :method2]
p B.instance_method(:method1).owner #=> A
```

In contrast, calling `private` or `public` on the same method does not cause any changes on the result of `B.instance_methods(false)`.

This feels like a bug in the implementation of `instance_methods(false)`, but, if it is by design, it should at least be documented on `Module#instance_methods`.

This reproduction script gives the same output all the way from Ruby 2.0 up to Ruby-HEAD:
https://wandbox.org/permlink/LqbXMBTYxURRZmDz



-- 
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>