From b6ec1891ec6280c186e78ec77b88e6934ca7d653 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pat Allan <pat@freelancing-gods.com>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 05:33:35 +0000
Subject: Update respond_to? calls for second argument.

Rack (since v2) has started explicitly listing the second
(optional) argument for respond_to?, which matches the
underlying Ruby spec. This patch fixes the calls in both C
and Ruby approaches.

[ew: add test, use rb_obj_respond_to if available]
---
 test/test_clogger_to_path.rb | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

(limited to 'test')

diff --git a/test/test_clogger_to_path.rb b/test/test_clogger_to_path.rb
index b437695..f74b991 100644
--- a/test/test_clogger_to_path.rb
+++ b/test/test_clogger_to_path.rb
@@ -14,6 +14,10 @@ class MyBody < Struct.new(:to_path, :closed)
   def close
     self.closed = true
   end
+
+private
+  def privtest
+  end
 end
 
 class TestCloggerToPath < Test::Unit::TestCase
@@ -59,6 +63,11 @@ class TestCloggerToPath < Test::Unit::TestCase
     status, headers, body = app.call(@req)
     assert_instance_of(Clogger, body)
     check_body(body)
+
+    assert ! body.respond_to?(:privtest)
+    assert body.respond_to?(:privtest, true)
+    assert ! body.respond_to?(:privtest, false)
+
     assert logger.string.empty?
     assert_equal tmp.path, body.to_path
     body.close
-- 
cgit v1.2.3-24-ge0c7