Closed byroot closed 3 years ago
@eregon should be good to go now. I'd rather handle testing register_scheme
in another PR.
Thanks for the fix!
BTW, it's interesting that const_defined?
raises NameError when it could return false.
Or that constant names are pretty strict (/\A[A-Z]\w*\z/), when method names are not (can include spaces etc).
But that's how it is in Ruby currently.
Thanks for the merge.
BTW, it's interesting that
const_defined?
raises NameError when it could return false.
I had the exact same thought. Not sure if worth changing upstream.
On another note, may I request for this changed to be pulled in ruby soonish? It's much harder to spot new breaking changes when we have existing failing tests.
On another note, may I request for this changed to be pulled in ruby soonish? It's much harder to spot new breaking changes when we have existing failing tests.
Done: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/59a65f2d2402e0d34d9232236f152d62e74f9483
This fixes a regression from https://github.com/ruby/uri/pull/26
https://buildkite.com/rails/rails/builds/79689#6a1b7cfc-fa17-4752-bc27-62158a228e79/1018-1029
Some symbols such as
-
,+
or.
are valid inside URI schemes. See: https://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes/uri-schemes.xhtml@eregon @hsbt