[#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,
Eric Hodel wrote:
>> This mail is for the topic '4. What $LOAD_PATH order should be?'
>> # We replace Ruby's require with our own, which is capable of
>> # loading gems on demand.
>> #
>> # When you call <tt>require 'x'</tt>, this is what happens:
>> # * If the file can be loaded from the existing Ruby loadpath, it
>> # is.
>> # * Otherwise, installed gems are searched for a file that matches.
>> # If it's found in gem 'y', that gem is activated (added to the
>> # loadpath).
>> #
>> # The normal <tt>require</tt> functionality of returning false if
>> # that file has already been loaded is preserved.
>
> The work of adding the gem's require_paths to $LOAD_PATH happens in
> Gem::activate.
>
>> Custom 'require' at first try to load the specified feature name from;
>> [-I, ENV_RUBYLIB, SITELIBDIR, RUBYLIBDIR, .]
>> When it raises LoadError then add GEMs at the top of $LOAD_PATH and try
>> to load the feature from;
>> [GEMs, -I, ENV_RUBYLIB, SITELIBDIR, RUBYLIBDIR, .]
>
> The behavior you describe is how 0.9.2 and previous worked.
Doh. Sorry for bothering you. I updated rubygems with
'gem update --system' and I confirmed that the behavior change you
explained.
> With GEMs before -I, the gem version can get loaded instead of the -I
> version.
>
> With GEMs after -I, the -I version will always be preferred.
Agreed.
So the topic 4-2 should be;
4. What $LOAD_PATH order should be?
4-2. after requiring rubygems?
[-I, ENV_RUBYLIB, GEMs, SITELIBDIR, RUBYLIBDIR, .]
As I wrote in the latest summary, this behavior should be up to RubyGems
team. RubyGems team can control this behavior.
Then why I raised the topic to this thread? Because I considered that
RubyGems may be enabled by default.
Eric,
- you are thinking that $LOAD_PATH does not include GEMs dirs by
default.
- you think that 'hooking -r option' is all the requirement for
ruby/1.9.1 to bundle RubyGems.
Right? So the expected behavior is as follows?
% gem install httpclient
(done)
% ruby -rhttpclient -e 'p HTTPClient.get_content("http://localhost/")'
=> ruby: no such file to load -- httpclient (LoadError)
% ruby -rgem -rhttpclient -e '...'
=> (runs fine)
Of course we can direct users to use RUBYOPT=-rgem trick to hide this
detail though.
I think RubyGems should not be enabled by default but once after using
RubyGems, GEMs dir should be checked without any trick until the time I
run 'gem cleanup'. Of course any other Ruby based new packaging system
can do the same thing. Isn't it the behavior we expect to a packaging
system?
As you know, it requires rather complicated 'require-hook' feature to
ruby such as;
- ruby checks "custom_require.rb" file in SITELIBDIR and load it before
enabling any feature.
It may be too much for ruby/1.9.1. 'To use gem, run ruby with "-rgem"
always' can be accepted for the first step I think.
>> Once an user found this answer, it gets easier to track down a loader
>> problem in soap4r-ml. The rest I want to know is where 'gem "soap4r"'
>> should be added in RoR environment... (I've not yet been a RoR user.)
>
> config/environment.rb is the correct place in RoR.
Thanks! It much help soap4r users.
// NaHi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
iQEVAwUBRqf+6x9L2jg5EEGlAQIkGQf/VypyqXj1yASSuaZSAtBVIzvHUkX+KiYj
z0GJjVztRXtrSlyqECoLNfm08hq9rsnQYR0p4ObTPzZU5GFADbVArnEE+gmFr/Mx
HN5nI7cYynt2ktHiNFuBS3z3uqLdyUBZM9u1nZPV51RQ5lvab7TV+mcgVrPqbI7X
vldMonN36DdB0PWyyZhYurq9RF1rEnYwYpDsljcv8ryo+Ourr4E+evkTkRgLrtOm
Hoee7UxngppEaZo/QegGrYFYwGh6wB/sG2mTrdDLbz2xIJMXMgte9P6+Yhn+rG39
BXAYY4/Qx9WROcUIyE48DT2IA3u/Y/gy5eWRXk8isGi5f09nA/xwQw==
=oWFH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----