[#11439] comments needed for Random class — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

15 messages 2007/06/12

[#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

17 messages 2007/06/13

[#11482] Ruby Changes Its Mind About Non-Word Characters — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Does this look like a bug to anyone else?

10 messages 2007/06/16

[#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

20 messages 2007/06/20
[#11512] Re: Question about the patchlevel release cycle — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2007/06/20

Hi, I'm the 1.8.6 branch manager.

[#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:

10 messages 2007/06/27

Re: Proc initialize method not called under certain circumstances

From: murphy <murphy@...>
Date: 2007-06-28 23:01:57 UTC
List: ruby-core #11554
> ... for language constructs that create
> built-in types like Range, Array, Hash etc that user-defined
> initialize methods are never called...
I would feel much better if I knew the reason for that. and please don't
say it's for performance reasons...

is there a design principle behind that? or some less obvious technical
limitation?

> Generally, Class.new calls .allocate and then #initialize on the returned
> object, but there's no guarantee that either of those methods will be used if
> the object is created a different way and/or if .new is overridden for a particular
> class.
thank you for this easy explanation, MenTaLguY!

In This Thread