Consider different name for extension

[jeremyevans]

@k0kubun Maybe I'm wrong, but I think using require 'erb.so' may make it more difficult for JRuby to provide a compatible extension. Ideally, I think it would be best to require 'erb/html_escape' or something similar to make it easier for alternative ruby implementations. CC @headius to confirm that this would make things easier for JRuby.

I'd like to get the final name for the extension decided before I start using it in Roda and Erubi.

[k0kubun]

I didn't work on it since I didn't hear from you again after my last comment in the previous thread, but I can move this forward.

I'm thinking about calling it erb/escape and ERB::Escape. Using erb.so was an idea to not introduce any new interface (of course I'm not expecting you to load .so directly), but the monkey patch of Rails changed my mind. It's shorter than including HTML as well in the module name, and there's still a small possibility to start doing the same thing for url escape to achieve the same optimization or to remove cgi from dependency in case we want to demote cgi to a bundled gem (bundler also uses cgi, so it needs to be resolved as well though).

If I get confirmation from you, I can add it or review/merge any pull request you want to add.

[headius]

Yes, erb/escape does make it easier for us to provide an equivalent extension. Additionally, should we consider making a separate html/url-escaping gem that both cgi and erb can depend on? I have not been following this closely, but aren't we duplicating logic form cgi/escape here?

[headius]

Specifically to confirm what @jeremyevans said... we do not recognize .so extensions as being loadable, which is the main problem. If there's a JRuby jar-based extension, we will be able to find it with the bare filename require.

[k0kubun]

should we consider making a separate html/url-escaping gem that both cgi and erb can depend on? I have not been following this closely, but aren't we duplicating logic form cgi/escape here?

This current situation around this is unfortunately intentional; the reason why erb started to have this was to introduce an "incompatibility" that seems intolerable in the cgi side, and adding a parameter to switch the behavior would make the interface ugly and/or let it perform worse in CRuby.

[jeremyevans]

I understand the need for different cgi/erb behavior, and it seems reasonable to me to keep the erb behavior in the erb gem. I think switching to require 'erb/escape' would be best. If you would like me to work on a pull request, I can probably do that.