[#9854] BUG: ruby-yarv 1.9 undefined method `close' for nil:NilClass in ensure — ville.mattila@...
Hello,
[#9864] String#upto edge case - empty string causes infinite loop — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi,
Hi,
On 1/8/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
On 1/8/07, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
On 1/9/07, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
[#9869] a block argument within a block which argument has the same name leaks — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7680, was opened at 2007-01-08 22:53
Hi,
On Jan 8, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Hi --
Hi,
Hi --
Hi,
Hi,
Evan Phoenix wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Jan 10, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
[#9897] Time Zone printing differently for 1.8.4 and 1.8.5. — "Jim Freeze" <jim@...>
> ruby -rparsedate -ve 'puts Time.mktime(* ParseDate.parsedate("Thu Nov 02
[#9908] rdoc for 1.8.5 not creating Module docs? — James Britt <james.britt@...>
When running rdoc over the current 1.8.5 source, the resulting HTML file
[#9926] Fix for File and File::Stat to deal with bogus stat.st_size member — <noreply@...>
Patches item #7760, was opened at 2007-01-11 14:26
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Berger, Daniel wrote:
[#9949] sandbox 0.4 (r115) with a new patch — _why <why@...>
Okay, here's the latest release of the freaky freaky sandbox.
[#9959] anonymous classes share single alloc function — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7974, was opened at 2007-01-18 13:28
[#9960] Scoping and locating definitions — Jos Backus <jos@...>
Consider the following:
Jos Backus schrieb:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 06:40:03PM +0900, Pit Capitain wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:18:19AM +0900, Jos Backus wrote:
On 1/20/07, Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> wrote:
Jos Backus schrieb:
On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 04:39:52AM +0900, Pit Capitain wrote:
Jos Backus schrieb:
[#9969] Allowing Unicode in the grammar? — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi Matz,
[#9996] new method dispatch rule (matz' proposal) — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
Hi,
It's late for me here, so I have just brief comments below...
Hi,
SASADA Koichi wrote:
Hi,
On Jan 23, 2007, at 7:41 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, James Edward Gray II wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
The more this discussion goes on, the more I worry that Joe Q Public
Hi,
[#10019] stable branch policy & schedule for 1.8.6 — "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>
Core developers,
Akinori MUSHA wrote:
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
On Jan 23, 2007, at 22:13, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
At Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:13:52 +0900,
Hello,
Hi,
[#10066] class variables and inheritance — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #8156, was opened at 2007-01-25 15:05
[#10068] Re: Method Dispatch (was Adding methods to String, but only in my own Module?) — gwtmp01@...
[#10085] Collaborative Ruby Language Specification — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
Hi Everyone,
On 1/28/07, John Lam (CLR) <jflam@microsoft.com> wrote:
Hi --
>> I'm not sure what there is to be non-neutral about :-)
Hi --
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
John Lam (CLR) wrote:
> I hope such a spec would be developed "in the open" from the beginning,
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 1/30/07, Eustaquio Rangel de Oliveira Jr. <eustaquiorangel@yahoo.com> wrote:
On 1/30/07, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:
> > I was checking some CLR opinions and - correct me please if I'm wrong - seems
[#10114] add usage of uri.userinfo to open-uri.rb — <noreply@...>
Patches item #8309, was opened at 2007-01-30 15:25
On 2007/01/31, at 06:07, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 01:19:34AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Hi matz,
Hi,
On Feb 2, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#10135] Another .document patch. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
I have been looking at the tips for irb at:
Re: Method Dispatch (was Adding methods to String, but only in my own Module?)
On Jan 25, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Jos Backus wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 06:35:07AM +0900, Greg Hurrell wrote:
>> Is there any way to add methods to the String class, but only within
>> the scope of a particular module?
>
> Glad to see I'm not the only one interested in this. See Pit
> Capitain's
> solution in the thread at
>
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/9982
>
> While I'm grateful for Pit's suggestion it's a rather suboptimal
> solution to
> the problem imho, and I wish this were possible in Ruby in a
> straightforward
> manner somehow.
ruby-core: this was originally just a response to Jos, but it has some
thoughts related to the public/protected/private discussion on ruby-core
The problem with the import-module solution is that it is ultimately
manipulating a global data structure (the class/module hierarchy) so
that the visibility of the changes (even if temporary) is defined
temporally and globally rather then lexically localized to particular
modules or classes.
One of the interesting aspects of Plan 9 is the idea of per-process
namespaces. In Plan 9, the file system is not a global data structure
that is visible to and shared by all processes. Instead, each
process constructs its own private view of the world. There are various
mechanisms to allow processes to share views (default) or to create
and manipulate their own private hierarchy (think of per-process
symlinks).
Switching back to Ruby, I wonder if the Plan 9 concepts of private
file hierarchies could be adapted to permit per-module/class views of
the
class hierarchy?
class A
enhance String, MyModule
def foo
"bar".my_method # my_method is resolved to MyModule#mymethod
# because the enhancement is visible in
A#foo
B.new.baz
end
end
class B
def baz
"bar".my_method # NameError because the enhancement is not
# visible in B.
end
end
The idea is that when methods *defined* in A are executing, they
see the String class enhanced (i.e. included) via MyModule. Methods
that are not explicitly defined within A don't see the enhancements.
I feel like this sort of thing is related to the ongoing discussion of
private over on ruby-core where the goal is to figure out how to keep
private methods visible only in a particular lexical scope (at least I
think that is the/a goal).
How about:
class A
enhance self do
def private_method_1
end
end
def public_method
private_method_1
end
end
A.new.private_method_1 # NameError
My main point is that as long as the class-hierarchy is considered a
global
data structure you are going to have a hard time dealing with name
clashes.
Having a way to construct lexically scoped class-hierarchies may be a
way around
this problem.
Gary Wright