ruby-core

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?

[#11549] Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/06/28

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

[#11550] Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/06/28

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 06:24:48 +0900, "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@microsoft.com> wrote:

[#11553] Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — "Marcel Molina Jr." <marcel@...> 2007/06/28

On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 06:54:49AM +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#11554] Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/06/28

> ... for language constructs that create

[#11560] Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/06/29

Hi,

[#11548] NilClass, TrueClass, FalseClass special cased for singleton classes? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>

If you do:

3 messages 2007/06/28

[#11557] Re: NilClass, TrueClass, FalseClass special cased for singleton classes? — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/06/29

Hi,

[#11559] Re: NilClass, TrueClass, FalseClass special cased for singleton classes? — Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@...> 2007/06/29

John Lam (CLR) wrote:

[#11555] Name of Classes — =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Wolfgang_N=E1dasi-Donner?= <wonado@...>

Moin, moin!

2 messages 2007/06/28

[#11558] Re: Name of Classes — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/06/29

Moin,

[#11556] delete_if with destructive methods in block — Florian Gross <florgro@...>

Hi,

3 messages 2007/06/29

[#11561] Re: [BUG] delete_if with destructive methods in block — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/06/29

Hi,

[#11567] Re: delete_if with destructive methods in block — Florian Gross <florgro@...> 2007/06/30

That fixes it for me. I got no regressions from Rubinius' hash spec

[#11562] Can clear frozen array using initialize() — Florian Gross <florgro@...>

Hi,

2 messages 2007/06/29

[#11563] Re: [BUG] Can clear frozen array using initialize() — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/06/30

Hi,

Re: Question about the patchlevel release cycle

From: Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org>

Date: 2007-06-20 07:11:35 UTC

List: ruby-core #11509

> could you refer to bug #s?

> > 1.8.6 thread support was broken in bad ways. It stayed for three
> > months
  unfortunately, I don't find the bugreport. It has been discussed first on 
  ruby-core and then opened (as far as I remember)
  See ruby-core:10594

> > 1.8.6-p36 is broken w.r.t. compilation of extensions and has a
> > thread bug.
  bug #11507
  there has been no bugreport (that I know of) for the compilation problem: 
  it has been fixed in SVN before anybody sent a report.
  See ruby-core:11499

> > Wouldn't it be possible to have "hotfixes" (i.e.: quick patchlevel
> > releases) when this kind of bugs happen ?
The problem is: how to make sure that a patched version is quickly released 
when Ruby is in a bad shape ? Some obvious bugs are in general fixed in 
svn before having a bugreport, ... and we can't assume that the release 
manager can follow all the commits in *both* ruby_1_8 and ruby_1_8_6

Moreover, maybe you need a process (tagging the commit logs, ...) to make 
sure that the bugfixes in ruby_1_8 that should go into 1_8_6 *do* go into 
the 1.8.6 branch (I'm thinking about bug #9376 for instance, which missed 
the p36 release. This one is quite minor, so that's not that much of a 
problem)

btw, neither the english version ruby-lang.org nor the project page on 
rubyforge mention p36.
-- 
Sylvain Joyeux

Thread

Prev Next

In This Thread

Prev Next