[#11383] Re: $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC — Brent Roman <brent@...>
Daz,
[#11396] Re: $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC — Brent Roman <brent@...>
Sylvain,
[#11401] Proc.== — David Flanagan <david@...>
Can anyone construct two proc objects p1 and p2, without using clone or
Hi,
Okay, anything other than the degenerate case of a proc with no body?
On Jun 4, 2007, at 22:57, David Flanagan wrote:
[#11409] Method introspection ? — "Jonas Pfenniger" <zimbatm@...>
Hello,
[#11418] currying in Ruby — David Flanagan <david@...>
I've written a little argument currying module for Procs and Methods. I
[#11431] Are there a better set of unit tests for Array? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
It seems like the unit tests that we have in Ruby.net were:
[#11439] comments needed for Random class — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 6/12/07, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nakahiro@sarion.co.jp> wrote:
[#11450] Re: new method dispatch rule (matz' proposal) — David Flanagan <david@...>
This is a late response to the very long thread that started back in
On 6/13/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:
On 6/13/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:
[#11457] Inclusion of bug #9376 in 1.8.6 branch — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>
Would it be possible to include the fix for bug #9376 in 1.8.6 ? It is not
[#11462] What should this code do? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
Thinking about control flow these days ...
[#11472] Strange Array#transpose behavior for custom to_ary method — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...>
Ruby 1.8.6 p36
[#11481] Ancestors for Singleton classes — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>
I am taking this away from ruby-talk as it contains patches.
[#11482] Ruby Changes Its Mind About Non-Word Characters — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Does this look like a bug to anyone else?
James Edward Gray II wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 16, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Vincent Isambart wrote:
> > It is because the and サ characters are not in ISO-8859-1.
[#11505] Question about the patchlevel release cycle — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>
1.8.6 thread support was broken in bad ways. It stayed for three months
> could you refer to bug #s?
Hi,
Hi, I'm the 1.8.6 branch manager.
On 6/20/07, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#11533] method_missing for Enumerator — TRANS <transfire@...>
What do others think of this for 1.9+?
[#11543] Re: Apple reportedly to ship with ruby 1.8.6-p36 unless informed what to patch — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
On Jun 27, 2007, at 4:47 PM, Bill Kelly wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 30, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
I haven't seen it mentioned explicitly in this thread so far, but I
[#11545] Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
class Proc
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:43:14 +0900, "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@microsoft.com> wrote:
So, is it correct to assume that for language constructs that create built-in types like Range, Array, Hash etc that user-defined initialize methods are never called?
Re: new method dispatch rule (matz' proposal)
On 6/13/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote: > Meinrad, > > I favor leaving private methods exactly as they currently are, but > adding a new mechanism or visibility level that a class writer can use > to ensure that local helper methods are not overwritten. Surely the > author of a class ought to have the right to decide whether subclassers > are allowed to meddle! > > David > Hmm, but if there is something about a superclass which cannot be changed (not even by using some backdoor) the re-usability of that class is poor because it might not be possible to adapt the class to specific needs. It is impossible for the author to predict all possible use cases. That's why everything should be allowed. Nobody wants that others decide what he needs or needs not. I agree with you that prevention of *accidental* overwriting of private methods is a good thing though. -- henon