[#11569] sprintf: Format specifier tokens aren't checked well enough — Florian Gross <florgro@...>
Hi,
Something seems to be broken for %u with negative bignums:
Hi,
[#11576] Array#delete is destructive, String#delete isn't — Florian Gross <florgro@...>
Hi,
[#11585] Array#values_at bug? — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
a =3D [1,2,3,4]
[#11588] Timeout doesn't work correctly under windows when executing complex regexp. — "yuanyi zhang" <zhangyuanyi@...>
To repeat the problem, just execute the below code(I've run it with
Hi,
[#11597] Optimizing Symbol#to_proc — murphy <murphy@...>
Greetings to the list!
[#11600] Bug in Kernel#method objects that call super? — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
This seems very wrong to me. Calling through a method object should
[#11609] GetoptLong w/ DSL — TRANS <transfire@...>
Hi--
Hi,
On 7/8/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#11611] Import gem to Ruby 1.9 — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
On Jul 8, 2007, at 00:49, SASADA Koichi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 7/17/07, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nakahiro@sarion.co.jp> wrote:
On 7/17/07, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
On Jul 17, 2007, at 01:26, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 7/18/07, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nakahiro@sarion.co.jp> wrote:
On 7/22/07, Chad Fowler <chad@chadfowler.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Jul 24, 2007, at 06:44, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sep 30, 2007, at 22:56 , NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 09:57 , Eric Hodel wrote:
Hi,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 13, 2007, at 02:00 , NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 13, 2007, at 08:00 , NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 15, 2007, at 07:14 , NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
On 10/17/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
Leonard Chin wrote:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 12:28 , Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
Eric Hodel wrote:
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
On Oct 17, 2007, at 14:53 , Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
Evan Phoenix wrote:
In article <4710890A.3020009@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <4718708D.3050001@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <471A1720.4080606@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <471CAFE0.2070104@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <471D4D1F.5050006@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <471D5665.5040209@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <471FF3B1.3060103@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <47200D74.6020202@sarion.co.jp>,
On Oct 13, 2007, at 01:24 , Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
In article <4722FEA4.6040509@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <472532B0.2060600@sarion.co.jp>,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <4726C4EF.7060605@sarion.co.jp>,
[#11635] to_str conversions and exceptions — "John Lam (CLR)" <jflam@...>
Silly question of the day:
[#11642] Re: Proposal: runtime-modifying Kernel methods should be keywords — "Marcel Molina Jr." <marcel@...>
On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 03:02:06PM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
Calamitas wrote:
I was going to reply to this In a detailed manner, but I'm not. (I
Ryan Davis wrote:
Ryan Davis wrote:
On 18/07/07, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
> PS: Incidentally... The comment on the blog entry you gave above
[#11645] Re: Proposal: runtime-modifying Kernel methods should be keywords — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Jul 13, 2007, at 2:09 AM, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
James Edward Gray II schrieb:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 11:19 PM, murphy wrote:
[#11648] Re: Proposal: runtime-modifying Kernel methods should be keywords — "John Lam" <jlam@...>
> 3. These methods are exactly the ones that complicate optimizing Ruby in
On 7/13/07, John Lam <jlam@iunknown.com> wrote:
TRANS wrote:
[#11673] Inheritable mixin — TRANS <transfire@...>
Concept for Ruby 2.0...
[#11691] rb_cstr_to_inum use of strtoul as an optimization has unfortunate side effects — Florian Gross <florgro@...>
Hi,
On another note, String#oct allows the base to be changed by a base
Hi,
[#11692] String#rindex(other) doesn't try to convert other via to_str — Florian Gross <florgro@...>
Hi,
[#11739] Re: Proposal: runtime-modifying Kernel methods should be keywords — Brent Roman <brent@...>
Just a follow up to on the idea of disallowing the
Brent Roman wrote:
On 17/07/07, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> wrote:
[#11754] indentation / emacs woes — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
OK. Can someone give me the tweaks I need to make ruby source read
[#11756] threads and heavy io on osx and linux — "ara.t.howard" <Ara.T.Howard@...>
Hung on the 13th run.
[#11795] What libraries to be unbundled? — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I don't think that json should be unbundled. It is the interchange
On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:39 PM, David Flanagan wrote:
James Edward Gray II wrote:
On 7/24/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 1, 2007, at 1:07 AM, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[#11821] Columnize, irb, and ruby-debug — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>
I've been working on/with Kent SIbilev's ruby-debug. The current sources in
[#11826] Rdoc allowing arbitrary HTML — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>
Hi all
Re: Import gem to Ruby 1.9
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Thanks for your comments, TRANS, Ryan and Eric. Good to know you all
are positive about including RubyGems.
TRANS and others, what libraries should be unbundled is the next (or the
next) topic. Wait for a while.
Matz, Syouhei, there seems to be no barrier to add RubyGems into
ruby/1.9.1 so far. Don't you disagree we can continue the discussion
about bundling RubyGems with Ruby/1.9.1?
Eric Hodel wrote:
>> > RubyGems is still missing one key feature, the ability to handle
>> > platform-specific gems. There may be a few other minor features that
>> > are missing, but I don't think RubyGems is ready for inclusion until
>> then.
>>
>> Are you and RubyGems maintainers negative to include RubyGems in
>> ruby/1.9.1 ?
>
> No, we'd really, really like RubyGems to be in core, but I'd really,
> really like to get the platform-specific gem handling working before it
> is in core.
>
> (The C stub to make ruby -r work with an in-core RubyGems should be easy
> to implement.)
>
> I'll have some free time coming up in August, so I may be able to get to
> it then.
Thanks for your work always about ruby.
In above which are you planning to implement 'platform-specific gem
handling' or 'C stub to make ruby -r work'? In the case of the latter
topic, ruby itself may be able to help it with adding common
'require-hook', if someone can design such a feature. We should do
things step by step so some features like above can be delayed to 1.9.2
though.
>> > Also, RubyGems can make releases faster than Ruby can, so it should
>> > still be possible to upgrade RubyGems to never versions independent of
>> > Ruby.
>>
>> Do you mean RubyGems can be a gem? Looks smart.
>
> Currently RubyGems updates come as a gem, but they get installed into
> site_ruby.
Like Ryan said, it's not as much of an issue. I was just impressed with
it. :-)
/ / /
At first, let's list issues about bundling RubyGems to ruby/1.9.1.
1. Is platform-specific gem handling needed?
2. Does RubyGems need some 'require-hook' feature to be added to
ruby/1.9.1? What's the requirements?
- hooks -r options
3. What gem related commands should be install in BINDIR by the standard
installer?
gem, gemlock, gemri, gemwhich, gem_mirror, gem_server,
index_gem_repository.rb, update_rubygems
Nothing should be installed? (I mean 'ruby -rgem -e update gemname')
4. What $LOAD_PATH order should be?
4-1. by default?
[RUBYLIBDIR, SITEDIR]
4-2. after requiring rubygems?
[GEMs, RUBYLIBDIR, SITEDIR] or
[RUBYLIBDIR, GEMs, SITEDIR] or
[RUBYLIBDIR, SITEDIR, GEMs]
5. Where's the global repository for bundled rubygems?
Of course RubyForge should be pointed. Do we need some
'rather official' repository at www.ruby-lang.org, too?
6. What libraries does RubyGems depend on?
- existing bundled libraries
- new libraries
I forgot to mention that rake should be added to 1.9.1, too.
// NaHi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (Cygwin)
iQEVAwUBRp3OjR9L2jg5EEGlAQI95AgAu1KyJSmx6yaEd7hOfOD0ASaN2DWm2xje
REIBQwF7NCRBTXKj0lDLq2eXFFpJttcyaAHWDxP0k4h4JpkBfm/q3oWm01r0qb1n
iNTCCercZAAFzOTyUtM56wFYPhItS4nvNtMVyLXg4Fu9G1YgGs82wb+N6jPWFs2Y
qPI8w+Kq6LAT96jxmNaGu5ivpYSC1TSS7WS91L2ljcB9dw5V+VTPJI6vhQYiDyn2
QGJv3+kkmvYJJXBr00pI7HNcYtEjdK1opmM63RttQM6OoaIi2Co0qSoEC5Vb9+vG
YE7UuQfbnpaYIlZ0dcELG4nFQdXMdWHcgF6YgzMrXYl7LR8veUAdHQ==
=cEpP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----