Mash#load uses except, a rails specific method?

I just updated the hashie gem and some of my code fails to run. The error I get is:

WARNING: unable to load thorfile "/data/doc/code/Susu/Thorfile": undefined method `except' for {}:Hash
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/2.7.0/gems/hashie-4.0.0/lib/hashie/mash.rb:77:in `load'

Checking out that method, it uses except on what seems like a standard Hash, but that has no method except. The only reference I found to an except method is from Rails. So this fails if monkey-patching rails is not loaded.

Is Mashie meant to be used only with Rails? Doesn't seem to be documented.

@dblock @michaelherold

Is Mashie meant to be used only with Rails? Doesn't seem to be documented.

no, Hashie::Mash should work with whatever, not sure what's going on here, but appreciate some digging/specs/repro

no, Hashie::Mash should work with whatever, not sure what's going on here, but appreciate some digging/specs/repro

I could make a small reproducible example, but frankly, the code just calls a non-existing method. So if I can save the time... Just look at the ruby api docs: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/2.7.0/

I would propose you use the delete method instead.

This is Ruby 2.7? We haven't gotten to it. Appreciate a PR with the fix + adding 2.7 to CI.

There is no except method in earlier versions of ruby either.

I see us adding it in Railtie,

hashie/lib/hashie/railtie.rb

Line 13 in ca36045

require 'hashie/extensions/active_support/core_ext/hash'

, which obviously only works for Rails. I am not sure what the history for this is.

Either way, if something is not working, the best way to fix it is to write a failing spec and a fix.

Just to avoid the expectations. I have a lot of chores to do on my own code, so I'm not volunteering to fix this.

What's probably happening is that either no integration tests exists for Mash::load or the integration tests turn on the monkey patching from rails for code that shouldn't depend on it.

I feel you are much better placed to look into that than I am, and it would probably cost you much less time since you are familiar with the code base already.

Just to avoid the expectations. I have a lot of chores to do on my own code, so I'm not volunteering to fix this.

Same.

Thanks for reporting this @najamelan, this was a bug introduced in 4.0.0 from a PR earlier in 2019, so we never caught it.

I've submitted a PR to resolve it, and will release a patch version once merged.

@BobbyMcWho Thanks for looking into it!