Is it possible to 'unload' ('un-require') a Ruby library?

Louis Maddox picture Louis Maddox · Nov 3, 2013 · Viewed 7.8k times · Source

I'm looking to load a few libraries, have them do some work, and then do the opposite of require to avoid compatibility errors later. I don't want to have to dump to a file and restart a shell, as the objects created (such as data) could be processed well by my other libraries, just not in the presence of the early ones I'm seeking to unload.

Anyone got any suggestions or know if this is possible? A conversation from 2006 didn't come to much conclusion-wise other than that 'it looks like Webrick manages to do this somehow'.

The libraries in question are Google_drive and Nokogiri (the spreadsheet processing library Roo depends on Google_drive for online spreadsheet reading/writing, as described at that link).

Answer

Ricardo Valeriano picture Ricardo Valeriano · Nov 3, 2013

Like @Alex said, you could use the Kernel#fork to create a new ruby process where you will require your libraries. The new forked process will have access to data loaded in the parent process:

def talk(msg)
  # this will allow us to see which process is
  # talking
  puts "#{Process.pid}: #{msg}"
end

# this data was loaded on the parent process
# and will be use in the child (and in the parent)
this_is_data = ["a", "b", "c"]

talk "I'm the father process, and I see #{this_is_data}"

# this will create a new ruby process
fork{
  talk "I'm another process, and I also see #{this_is_data}"
  talk "But when I change `this_is_data`, a new copy of it is created"
  this_is_data << "d"
  talk "My own #{this_is_data}"
}

# let's wait and give a chance to the child process
# finishes before the parent
sleep 3

talk "Now, in the father again, data is: #{this_is_data}"

The result of this execution will vary in your machine, the Process.id will return different values, but it will be like these:

23520: I'm the father process, and I see ["a", "b", "c"]
23551: I'm another process, and I also see ["a", "b", "c"]
23551: But when I change `this_is_data`, a new copy of it is created
23551: My own ["a", "b", "c", "d"]
23520: Now, in the father again, data is: ["a", "b", "c"]

And this is good! Each process created by fork is an O.S. level process and run in it's own memory space.

Another thing you can do to somehow manage the globals created by loading a file, is replace the use of require by load. This approach doesn't solve all the problems already pointed, but really can help. See the following specs:

require "minitest/autorun"

describe "Loading files inside a scope" do

  def create_lib_file(version)
    libfile = <<CODE
      class MyLibrary#{version}
        VERSION = "0.0.#{version}"
      end

      class String
        def omg_danger!
        end
      end

      puts "loaded \#{MyLibrary#{version}::VERSION}"
    CODE

    File.write("my_library.rb", libfile)
  end

  after do
    File.delete("my_library.rb") if File.exists?("my_library.rb")
  end

  describe "loading with require" do
    it "sees the MyLibrary definition" do
      create_lib_file("1")
      require_relative "my_library.rb"
      MyLibrary1::VERSION.must_be :==, "0.0.1"
      "".respond_to?(:omg_danger!).must_be :==, true
    end
  end

  describe "loading with #load " do
    describe "without wrapping" do
      it "sees the MyLibrary definition" do
        create_lib_file("2")
        load "my_library.rb"
        MyLibrary2::VERSION.must_be :==, "0.0.2"
        "".respond_to?(:omg_danger!).must_be :==, true
      end
    end

    describe "using anonymous module wraping" do
      it "doesn't sees MyLibrary definition" do
        create_lib_file("3")
        load "my_library.rb", true
        ->{ MyLibrary3 }.must_raise NameError
        "".respond_to?(:omg_danger!).must_be :==, false
      end
    end
  end
end

And the result of execution:

Run options: --seed 16453

# Running tests:

loaded 0.0.3
.loaded 0.0.2
.loaded 0.0.1
.

Finished tests in 0.004707s, 637.3486 tests/s, 1274.6973 assertions/s.

3 tests, 6 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips