[#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,

Thread.abort_on_exception= in Ruby 1.9

From: David Flanagan <david@...>
Date: 2007-08-08 21:06:52 UTC
List: ruby-core #11873
Hi,

Thread.abort_on_exception=true is not working the way I would expect it 
to in Ruby 1.9 (my build is from 7/24).

Is this "just a bug" or a "not yet implemented" issue or is it a more 
fundamental problem exposed by YARV's use of native threads?  That is, 
should we treate abort_on_exception= as a non-portable method useful 
only for implementations that use green threads?

Here's the test code I'm using:

Thread.abort_on_exception = true

t = Thread.new {
   sleep 1
   raise "boom"
}

t.abort_on_exception = true

sleep 2
puts "done"

It goes "boom" in Ruby 1.8:

$ ruby -v boom.rb
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-03-13 patchlevel 0) [i686-linux]
boom.rb:5: boom (RuntimeError)
         from boom.rb:3:in `initialize'
         from boom.rb:3:in `new'
         from boom.rb:3

But it prints "done" in Ruby 1.9:

$ ruby1.9 -v boom.rb
ruby 1.9.0 (2007-07-24 patchlevel 0) [i686-linux]
done



In This Thread

Prev Next