[#107867] Fwd: [ruby-cvs:91197] 8f59482f5d (master): add some tests for Unicode Version 14.0.0 — Martin J. Dürst <duerst@...>
To everybody taking care of continuous integration:
3 messages
2022/03/13
[#108090] [Ruby master Bug#18666] No rule to make target 'yaml/yaml.h', needed by 'api.o' — duerst <noreply@...>
Issue #18666 has been reported by duerst (Martin D端rst).
7 messages
2022/03/28
[#108117] [Ruby master Feature#18668] Merge `io-nonblock` gems into core — "Eregon (Benoit Daloze)" <noreply@...>
Issue #18668 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
22 messages
2022/03/30
[ruby-core:108011] [Ruby master Feature#18566] Merge `io-wait` and `io-nonblock` gems into core IO
From:
"mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <noreply@...>
Date:
2022-03-22 05:20:35 UTC
List:
ruby-core #108011
Issue #18566 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh). This issue was discussed at the dev meeting. The motivating issue of this proposal (the dependency issue of io-wait / net-protocol / net-smtp) is already solved by removing the dependency from net-protocol to io-wait. If so, there is no strong reason to make io-wait built-in. This does not mean we should keep it as a separate gem. It is possible to make it built-in. However, @matz said that some methods in io-wait are very arguable to make them built-in. * `wait_readable` and `wait_writable` are maybe okay. * No attendee knows what `wait_priority` is. * The name `ready?` sounds weird because it does not say "what is ready". Maybe renaming is needed. (`ready_to_read?` or what not?) * `nread` is clearly a very bad name. The use case is neither clear. @nobu, who introduced the method, said that he himself regretted its introduction. It would be good to create a ticket and discuss for each method, rather than making the gem entirely built-in. After some methods are built-in (with different names), io-wait gem should remain to keep aliases for compatibility. @akr was against to make io/nonblock built-in because it is a old-style interface for nonblock IOs. He recommended `IO#read_nonblock` and `IO#write_nonblock` instead of the gem. ---------------------------------------- Feature #18566: Merge `io-wait` and `io-nonblock` gems into core IO https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18566#change-96968 * Author: byroot (Jean Boussier) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- I think we should reconsider status of `io-wait`, and consider simply merging it into core's `IO`. According to @nobu it's only a gem for "historical" reasons. Any non trivial IO code will likely make use of it, and it's just 400 lines of code. Recently with the extraction of `net-protocol`, it was added add a dependency and that caused Ruby 3.1 compatibility issues with some gems (e.g. with [`mail`](https://github.com/mikel/mail/pull/1439)). ### Proposal - Merge `io-wait` into `io.c` for Ruby 3.2 - Remove `io-wait` as a dependency of all gems maintained by `ruby-core` (e.g. `net-protocol`). - Publish a new `io-wait` version that is simply an empty gem. - Add a `lib/io/wait.rb` stub, with eventually a deprecation warning. cc @eregon @headius @mame @ioquatix -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>