[#11852] continuations in Ruby 1.9? — David Flanagan <david@...>
In a comment on my recent blog post
On 8/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:
[#11860] Is this really what we want? — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
I'm investigating some recent breakage in FasterCSV and have tracking
Hi,
[#11871] ruby-openssl: == incorrect for X509-Subjects — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>
Hi,
[#11876] priorities of newly-created threads — David Flanagan <david@...>
Hi,
Hi,
[#11886] Core dump with simple web scraper when run via cron — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi all,
[#11890] Ruby and Solaris door library — "Hiro Asari" <asari.ruby@...>
Hi, there. This is my first patch against ruby. I think I followed
Hiro Asari wrote:
On 8/13/07, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
On 8/15/07, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
[#11893] UDP sockets raise exception on MIPS platform — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>
I am running ruby-1.8.6 under OpenWrt (*), which is a small MIPS platform
[#11894] IO#seek and whence problem — Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
[#11899] pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:50:01AM +0900, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 02:45:20PM +0900, Brian Candler wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 05:17:09PM +0200, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
Dumb question of the day: are Kernel#proc and Kernel#lambda identical?
> Dumb question of the day: are Kernel#proc and Kernel#lambda identical?
[#11900] missing bison, gperf not detected, do I need ruby to build ruby? — "Gabor Szabo" <szabgab@...>
Hi,
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> > It seems ./configure did not detect the fact that bison was missing from
[#11930] Bug in select? — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>
Hi
[#11945] Smoke testing Ruby — "Gabor Szabo" <szabgab@...>
Hi,
On 8/21/07, Gabor Szabo <szabgab@gmail.com> wrote:
Ruby used to have the Triple-R project based on Rubicon: see
Hugh Sasse wrote:
[#11947] Splatting MatchData bug? — Jos Backus <jos@...>
$ /tmp/ruby-1.9/bin/ruby -v
[#11948] Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — David Flanagan <david@...>
I just noticed that my ruby1.9 build of August 17th includes a Fiber
David Flanagan wrote:
On 8/22/07, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:50:12 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/22/07, MenTaLguY <mental@rydia.net> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 00:57:01 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:
[#11960] coroutines with Fiber::Core — David Flanagan <david@...>
The following code works on Linux with today's snapshot of 1.9:
Hi,
[#11981] Inverse Square Root — "Dave Pederson" <dave.pederson@...>
Hello-
[#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.
Hi,
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:54:20 +0200, Yukihiro Matsumoto
Hi,
On 8/25/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
On 8/25/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#12025] how to build ruby on vms — "toni" <toni@...>
Hi,
[#12040] Pragmas in Ruby 1.9 — David Flanagan <david@...>
Hi,
[#12042] Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — David Flanagan <david@...>
This message contains queries that probably only Matz can answer:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
On 8/31/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Re: Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes?
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote: > > or possible alternative in the distant future may be: > > m = "\343\201\276\343\201\244\343\202\202\343\201\250".utf8 > m = "\343\201\276\343\201\244\343\202\202\343\201\250"u > m = "\343\201\276\343\201\244\343\202\202\343\201\250"e:utf8 > Matz, for what it's worth, the .utf8 is okay, but the other syntaxes seem very poor and create issues with heredocs. # this works m = <<EOF.utf8 \343\201\276\343\201\244\343\202\202\343\201\250 EOF # this will probably be hard to parse properly m = <<EOFu \343\201\276\343\201\244\343\202\202\343\201\250 EOF Also, at least to me, assuming a long string without a heredoc, it makes it hard to read (as the intent is not clear till the end). For me, at least, it would look much more logical to have the encoding first: a = u"...." or a = utf8:"" as it makes the intent of the string more clear. I am also not to fond of python's approach, but I don't think placing the encoding at the end is better. -- Gonzalo Garramu ggarra@advancedsl.com.ar AMD4400 - ASUS48N-E GeForce7300GT Kubuntu Edgy