[#10492] Ruby 1.8.6 preview3 has been released — "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>

Hi,

26 messages 2007/03/04
[#10500] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 preview3 has been released — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...> 2007/03/05

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Akinori MUSHA wrote:

[#10507] Dynamic Array#join with block — <noreply@...>

Patches item #9055, was opened at 2007-03-05 19:57

12 messages 2007/03/05
[#10520] Re: [ ruby-Patches-9055 ] Dynamic Array#join with block — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/03/06

Hi,

[#10594] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>

In ext/thread/thread.c, remove_one leaves the list in an inconsistent state.

15 messages 2007/03/14
[#10596] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:15:57 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10597] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/14

> > The fix is in thread-mutex-remove_one.diff.

[#10598] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:19:04 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10599] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/14

On Wednesday 14 March 2007 17:29, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#10600] Re: [PATCH] grave bug in 1.8.6's thread implementation — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/14

On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:48:42 +0900, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@m4x.org> wrote:

[#10615] Multiton in standard library — TRANS <transfire@...>

Hi--

16 messages 2007/03/15
[#10619] Re: Multiton in standard library — Tom Pollard <tomp@...> 2007/03/16

[#10620] Re: Multiton in standard library — TRANS <transfire@...> 2007/03/16

On 3/15/07, Tom Pollard <tomp@earthlink.net> wrote:

[#10646] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #9376, was opened at 2007-03-19 15:58

12 messages 2007/03/19
[#10647] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2007/03/19

noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:

[#10648] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/03/19

On Monday 19 March 2007 18:01, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:

[#10651] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/03/19

Hi,

[#10665] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-9376 ] Marshal.dump shouldn't complain about singletons if the _dump method is defined — "Chris Carter" <cdcarter@...> 2007/03/20

On 3/19/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#10712] Ruby Method Signatures (was Re: Multiton in standard library) — "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale@...>

On 3/19/07, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:

10 messages 2007/03/21
[#10715] Re: Ruby Method Signatures (was Re: Multiton in standard library) — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2007/03/22

On 3/19/07, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:

[#10798] Virtual classes and 'real' classes -- why? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>

I was wondering if someone could help me understand why there's a parallel =

12 messages 2007/03/28
[#10799] Re: Virtual classes and 'real' classes -- why? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/03/28

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 04:44:16 +0900, "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@microsoft.com> wrote:

Re: Extensions to ipaddr.rb

From: Jos Backus <jos@...>
Date: 2007-03-22 16:31:12 UTC
List: ruby-core #10737
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 03:58:51PM +0900, Brian Candler wrote:
[snip]
> > class IPAddr
> >   def entries
> >     list = []
> >     0.upto(~@mask_addr & IN4MASK) do |i|
> >       list << IPAddr.new(_to_string(@addr + i))
> >     end
> >     list
> >   end
> > end
> > 
> > ip = IPAddr.new("192.168.5.0/28")
> > ip.entries.each do |ip|
> >   puts ip
> > end
> 
> I would do it differently; give class IPAddr an 'each' method which yields
> each of the values (perhaps delegating to Range#each), and then make it
> Enumerable.

Agreed. This was just a 5 minute hack to demonstrate the idea. This capability
is currently lacking entirely and would be very useful (at least to me).

> Otherwise, if you call 'entries' on a /48 IPv6 address you will generate an
> intermediate array with 2^80 entries :-(
 
Yeah. A generator-based approach is better as no intermediate Array is
created.

> Now, arguably a Range might be better internal data structure than an address
> plus mask, as both 'include?' and 'size' would be trivial. You could then do
>    IPAddr.new("192.168.0.5", "192.168.0.13")
> which might be useful. You could even subclass Range.
> 
> But I wasn't coming here to suggest a redesign of IPAddr - it works, and it
> does *almost* what I want already. However, given a (say) /28 prefix, I need
> to be able to find:
> 
>   - the base address + 1 (router IP)
>   - the base address + 2 (dhcp start)
>   - the end of the block - 2 (dhcp end)
>   - the end of the block - 1 (broadcast)
>   - the netmask
> 
> That's why I proposed those new methods, as there doesn't seem to be a
> straightforward way to do it otherwise without digging directly in with
> instance_eval.
 
Indeed. Hopefully this will make it into ipaddr.rb in some form.

-- 
Jos Backus
jos at catnook.com

In This Thread

Prev Next