| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Follow up of 03d3f036.
Some of `respond_to?` were replaced to `respond_to_missing?` in 03d3f036.
But the visibility is still public. It should be private.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This was almost every case where we are overriding `respond_to?` in a
way that mirrors a parallel implementation of `method_missing`. There is
one remaining case in Active Model that should probably do the same
thing, but had a sufficiently strange implementation that I want to
investigate it separately.
Fixes #26333.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The current code base is not uniform. After some discussion,
we have chosen to go with double quotes by default.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This has 2 effects:
1. RoutesProxy is CRAZY faster because it's no longer creating a new
Module each time method_missing is hit.
2. It bypasses an existing bug in ruby that makes `class << obj` unsafe
to be used in threading contexts.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|