[#11890] Ruby and Solaris door library — "Hiro Asari" <asari.ruby@...>

Hi, there. This is my first patch against ruby. I think I followed

19 messages 2007/08/13
[#11892] Re: Ruby and Solaris door library — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/14

Hiro Asari wrote:

[#11899] pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>

Hi,

13 messages 2007/08/14
[#11903] Re: pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2007/08/15

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:50:01AM +0900, Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#11948] Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — David Flanagan <david@...>

I just noticed that my ruby1.9 build of August 17th includes a Fiber

22 messages 2007/08/22
[#11949] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/22

David Flanagan wrote:

[#11950] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2007/08/22

On 8/22/07, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11952] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/08/22

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:50:12 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11988] String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Vincent Isambart" <vincent.isambart@...>

I saw that Matz just merged his M17N implementation in the trunk.

17 messages 2007/08/25
[#11991] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Michael Neumann" <mneumann@...> 2007/08/25

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:54:20 +0200, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#11992] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/25

Hi,

[#12042] Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — David Flanagan <david@...>

This message contains queries that probably only Matz can answer:

16 messages 2007/08/31
[#12043] Re: Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/31

Hi,

Re: Is this really what we want?

From: "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Date: 2007-08-07 22:41:39 UTC
List: ruby-core #11862
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Edward Gray II [mailto:james@grayproductions.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 2:09 PM
> To: Ruby Core
> Subject: Is this really what we want?
> 
> 
> I'm investigating some recent breakage in FasterCSV and have 
> tracking  
> it down to a change in the Date standard library.  Is this 
> really the  
> desired behavior now:
> 
>    $ ruby -r date -e 'p Date.parse("junk")'
>    #<Date: 4908505/2,0,2299161>
> 
> ?
> 
> In previous versions of Ruby that code raised an 
> ArgumentError, which  
> I feel was a lot more correct.
> 
> In any case, if the above is now intended, the documentation for  
> Date::parse is now wrong and needs to be updated.

Something definitely broke between 1.8.5 and 1.8.6 with Date.parse, as
I've experienced breakage with some of my MS Windows libraries as well.

I can only guess the discussion surrounding such changes must have
happened on ruby-dev, because I sure don't remember any discussion about
it, and there's nothing in the Changelog about it, either.

Perhaps someone from ruby-dev can tell us what happened and why it
happened.

Regards,

Dan


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication 
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy 
all copies of the communication and any attachments.


In This Thread