[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: [PATCH] URI::Generic#userinfo

From: "Jonas Pfenniger" <zimbatm@...>
Date: 2007-02-14 15:32:15 UTC
List: ruby-core #10299
2007/2/14, Zev Blut <rubyzbibd@ubit.com>:
>
> In case you are wondering, it appears that Matz has commited your
> patch to trunk.  Congrats!


Yay !

http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/trunk/ChangeLog?r1=11714&r2=11713
>
> http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/trunk/lib/uri/generic.rb?r1=11714&r2=11713
>
> Considering that this a bug fix, shouldn't this also go into the 1.8
> branch?


I think it should, in the fact, this patch got forward-ported from my local
ruby-1.8.5 patches.

I'm also seeing another case for improvement, but I'm not sure. If the user
gets removed, shouldn't the password get removed too ? I don't know how much
trouble that would be, but imagine you get an url, set a user and TADA!
you've got a password from nowhere. See :

uri = URI('http://user:pass@example.org')
uri.user = nil
----- somewhere else in the code --
puts uri #=> "http://example.org"
uri.user = 'matz'
puts uri #=> "http://matz:pass@example.org" # huh ? where did 'pass' come
from ?

If you consider that the first part is in a library and the second in your
application, this can be confusing. On the other part, you may want to
retain the password even if it's not displayed. This is why I don't know if
it's a bug or a feature.

-- 
Cheers,
  zimbatm

In This Thread