[#12372] Release compatibility/train — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...>

Hello all,

28 messages 2007/10/03
[#12373] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12374] Re: Release compatibility/train — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12376] Re: Release compatibility/train — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2007/10/03

[#12377] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12382] Re: Release compatibility/train — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12385] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12388] Re: Release compatibility/train — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12389] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12406] Re: Release compatibility/train — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2007/10/03

Hi --

[#12383] Include Rake in Ruby 1.9 — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

20 messages 2007/10/03

[#12539] Ordered Hashes in 1.9? — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>

Hi all,

17 messages 2007/10/08
[#12542] Re: Ordered Hashes in 1.9? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/08

Hi,

[#12681] Unicode: Progress? — murphy <murphy@...>

Hello!

17 messages 2007/10/15

[#12693] retry: revised 1.9 http patch — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>

I'm reposting this because I've had little response to this version

11 messages 2007/10/15

[#12697] Range.first is incompatible with Enumerable.first — David Flanagan <david@...>

The new Enumerable.first method is a generalization of Array.first to

11 messages 2007/10/16

[#12754] Improving 'syntax error, unexpected $end, expecting kEND'? — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>

I've had a look at this, but can't see how to do it: When I get

17 messages 2007/10/18
[#12886] Re: Improving 'syntax error, unexpected $end, expecting kEND'? — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

The patch below changes this message to:

[#12758] Encoding::primary_encoding — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

25 messages 2007/10/18
[#12763] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/19

Hi,

[#12802] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/21

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12803] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/21

Hi,

[#12804] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/21

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12808] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12818] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/22

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12820] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...> 2007/10/22

T24gMjIvMTAvMjAwNywgV29sZmdhbmcgTsOhZGFzaS1Eb25uZXIgPGVkLm9kYW5vd0B3b25hZG8u

[#12823] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/22

Michal Suchanek schrieb:

[#12824] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12767] \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...>

Back at the end of August, Matz wrote (see

45 messages 2007/10/19
[#12769] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — "Nobuyoshi Nakada" <nobu@...> 2007/10/19

Hi,

[#12782] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/20

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#12831] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12841] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/22

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12862] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/23

At 04:19 07/10/23, David Flanagan wrote:

[#12864] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

Martin Duerst wrote:

[#12870] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/23

At 13:10 07/10/23, David Flanagan wrote:

[#12872] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

Martin Duerst wrote:

[#12936] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/25

Hi,

[#12980] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/26

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#13028] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/29

Hi,

[#13032] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/29

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#13034] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/29

Hi,

[#13082] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/30

At 16:46 07/10/29, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#13231] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/11/06

Hi,

[#13234] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/11/06

At 11:29 07/11/06, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#12825] clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...>

Hi,

53 messages 2007/10/22
[#12830] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Ben Bleything <ben@...> 2007/10/22

On Mon, Oct 22, 2007, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#12833] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/22

On 23/10/07 at 00:13 +0900, Ben Bleything wrote:

[#12835] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/22

On 10/22/07, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:

[#12836] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/22

On 23/10/07 at 01:55 +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#12888] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/10/23

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#12894] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/24

On 24/10/07 at 05:14 +0900, Gonzalo Garramu wrote:

[#13057] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/10/29

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#13058] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/29

On 30/10/07 at 07:28 +0900, Gonzalo Garramu wrote:

[#12848] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Sam Roberts <sroberts@...> 2007/10/22

On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 01:55:29AM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#12855] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/23

On 10/22/07, Sam Roberts <sroberts@uniserve.com> wrote:

[#13016] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — bob@... (Bob Proulx) 2007/10/28

Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#13029] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/29

On 10/28/07, Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> wrote:

[#13054] Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/29

Austin,

[#13055] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/29

On 10/29/07, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:

[#13064] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/29/07, Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com> wrote:

[#13066] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/30/07, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:

[#13094] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Rick Bradley" <rick@...> 2007/10/30

Do we think that maybe, just maybe, things went off the rails when the

[#13095] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/30/07, Rick Bradley <rick@rickbradley.com> wrote:

[#12900] Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...>

Dear Ruby 1.9 architects, developers, and testers!

31 messages 2007/10/24
[#12905] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/24

Hi,

[#12907] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/24

Yukihiro Matsumoto schrieb:

[#12909] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/24

Hi,

[#12940] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/25
[#12942] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/25

I have a (hopefully) final question before testing all

[#12948] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/26

Hi,

[#12951] Fluent programming in Ruby — David Flanagan <david@...>

From the ChangeLog:

16 messages 2007/10/26

[#12996] General hash keys for colon notation — murphy <murphy@...>

Dear language designer(s) and parser wizards,

16 messages 2007/10/28

[#13027] Implementation of "guessUTF" method - final questions — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...>

Dear Ruby designers, developers, and testers!

22 messages 2007/10/29

[#13069] new Enumerable.butfirst method — David Flanagan <david@...>

Matz,

17 messages 2007/10/30

Re: Import gem to Ruby 1.9

From: Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
Date: 2007-10-31 23:16:49 UTC
List: ruby-core #13146
In article <4726C4EF.7060605@sarion.co.jp>,
  "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@sarion.co.jp> writes:

> I think that RubyGems team possibly does not like this kind of logic
> duplication.  Note that it's just a thought of mine.  I've heard nothing
> about this from RubyGems team.

The logic is not identical.  RubyGems itself (and yours) is
accurate but memory consuming.  My tiny RubyGems loader is
not accurate but not memory saving

They are difficult to unify them.

> Code duplication and independent maintainer as I wrote above.

They cause maintainance cost, but I take it.  Any other
problem?

> If it's not evil or worse, just let users use RUBYOPT as a charm to use
> rubygems.  What's the difference?  But...

RUBYOPT is not required for using RubyGems.
disable-rubygems-loader.rb is used for disabling RubyGems.

I know you try to force us to use RUBYOPT for RubyGems.  But
I don't want to define RUBYOPT to simply use a installed
library.

> Here's my try;

Oops.  I tryed with internal version which try to remove
RubyGems loader.

However I can't reploduce your problem.

> module Kernel
>   alias original_require require
>   def require(feature)
>     original_require feature
>   rescue LoadError
>     if require 'rubygems'
>       require feature
>     else
>       raise
>     end
>   end
> end

I modified this to check LoadError at require 'rubygems'.

module Kernel
  alias _original_require require
  def require(feature)
    _original_require feature
  rescue LoadError => e
    if begin
         _original_require 'rubygems'
       rescue LoadError
         raise e
       end
      require feature
    else
      raise
    end
  end
end

> 0% cat foo.rb

foo.rb is exactly as yours.

> 0% RUBYOPT=-rfoo ruby19 -e 'require "httpclient"'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.9/gemloader.rb:44: warning: already
> initialized constant OPS
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.9/gemloader.rb:94: warning: already
> initialized constant Requirement
> gemloader.rb intercepted rubygems loading
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.9/rubygems/specification.rb:629:in
> `method_missing': undefined method `<<' for {}:Hash (NoMethodError)
>         from
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.9/rubygems/specification.rb:629:in
> `add_dependency'

% ./ruby -rfoo -e 'require "redcloth"; p RedCloth' 
/home/src/ruby/gems19/ruby/gemloader.rb:44: warning: already initialized constant OPS
/home/src/ruby/gems19/ruby/gemloader.rb:94: warning: already initialized constant Requirement
RedCloth
% ./ruby -rfoo -e 'require "httpclient"'          
/home/src/ruby/gems19/ruby/gemloader.rb:44: warning: already initialized constant OPS
/home/src/ruby/gems19/ruby/gemloader.rb:94: warning: already initialized constant Requirement

The exception is not raised.

Note that I used gemloader.rb r13.
(Actually I used r12 supporting 1.9 myself at first.  It is
almost identical with r13.)

> The last exception is the 'Name crash' I wrote in the previous mail.

I'm not sure what causes your exception.

However I'm thinking to update my proposal to use
[ruby-dev:32161].

> Now foo.rb loads gemloader.rb but think when I want to use one of a
> custom loader (not existing now) I wrote in [ruby-core:12774].  Say
> signed tarball loader.  It might have another repository which has
> signed tarballs but RubyGems loads a gem instead of it, isn't it?

If a gem is installed, yes.  If a gem is not installed, no.

>> Do you think about that an administrator installs a library
>> as a gem but an user doesn't want to use it?
>
> Hmm.  I didn't think about it in detail but yes, it should be a
> situation I'm wondering about.  For example, a Leopard user may want to
> use mydevelgemloader.rb which only loads gems from ~/mydevel/gems.

In the condition under conflicts between an administrator
and an user, it is very difficult to solve the problem.

I think (or hope) such conflicting situation is rare.
An administrators intention, use a installed gem, should be
used by default.
-- 
Tanaka Akira

In This Thread