[#13842] Better introspection for Frames, Thread, and enhancing binding. — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>

The below is a little long. So here's a summary.

11 messages 2007/12/01

[#13851] Array#flatten works quadratic time on length of resulting array. It could be linear — "Voroztsov Artem" <artem.voroztsov@...>

I encountered problem with Array#flatten slowness (it can be much

19 messages 2007/12/03
[#13863] Re: Array#flatten works quadratic time on length of resulting array. It could be linear — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/03

Voroztsov Artem wrote:

[#13867] Re: Array#flatten works quadratic time on length of resulting array. It could be linear — "Voroztsov Artem" <artem.voroztsov@...> 2007/12/03

2007/12/3, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com>:

[#13868] Re: Array#flatten works quadratic time on length of resulting array. It could be linear — "Voroztsov Artem" <artem.voroztsov@...> 2007/12/03

2007/12/3, Voroztsov Artem <artem.voroztsov@gmail.com>:

[#13870] Re: Array#flatten works quadratic time on length of resulting array. It could be linear — "Yusuke ENDOH" <mame@...> 2007/12/03

Hi,

[#13903] Clarification of retry change — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>

Matz confirmed that retry-outside-rescue will no longer work, but I

14 messages 2007/12/07
[#13905] Re: Clarification of retry change — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2007/12/07

Hi,

[#13908] What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...>

20 messages 2007/12/07
[#13913] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/12/07

Hi,

[#13914] Re: [Spam] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/12/07

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#13926] Re: [Spam] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/12/07

T24gRGVjIDcsIDIwMDcgODoyMSBBTSwgR29uemFsbyBHYXJyYW11w7FvIDxnZ2FycmFAYWR2YW5j

[#14038] Re: [Spam] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — "Joe Swatosh" <joe.swatosh@...> 2007/12/12

Hi Luis

[#14039] Re: [Spam] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/12/12

On Dec 12, 2007 4:05 PM, Joe Swatosh <joe.swatosh@gmail.com> wrote:

[#14040] Re: [Spam] Re: What's the status of compiler/compiling on windows? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/12/12

> This was discussed in other thread in ruby-talk, but just to summarize:

[#13969] redefineable not operator — David Flanagan <david@...>

Matz,

37 messages 2007/12/10
[#13971] Re: redefineable not operator — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/12/10

David Flanagan wrote:

[#13972] Re: redefineable not operator — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/12/10

Hi,

[#14007] Re: redefineable not operator — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/12/11

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#14011] Re: redefineable not operator — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/12/11

Hi,

[#14013] Re: redefineable not operator — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/12/12

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#14016] Re: redefineable not operator — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/12/12

murphy wrote:

[#14019] Re: redefineable not operator — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/12/12

Hi,

[#14024] Re: redefineable not operator — Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...> 2007/12/12

[#14029] Re: redefineable not operator — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/12

[#14042] Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9 — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>

E2MM.Raise complains about $! being read-only now, and E2MM is used by

22 messages 2007/12/13
[#14043] Re: Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9 — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/13

[#14049] RDoc + irb (Was: Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2007/12/13

On Dec 12, 2007, at 16:19 PM, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#14052] Re: RDoc + irb (Was: Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9) — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/13

[#14056] Re: RDoc + irb (Was: Fix e2mmap.rb for 1.9) — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/13

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#14123] Some Ruby 1.9 loose ends to tie up — David Flanagan <david@...>

Matz,

20 messages 2007/12/17
[#14220] Re: Some Ruby 1.9 loose ends to tie up — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/12/21

Hi,

[#14238] Re: Some Ruby 1.9 loose ends to tie up — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/22

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#14147] named captures assigning to local variables — David Flanagan <david@...>

I've just been browsing ruby-dev. For an english speaker, it is kind of

26 messages 2007/12/19
[#14150] Re: named captures assigning to local variables — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2007/12/19

In article <47686B87.7050609@davidflanagan.com>,

[#14158] Re: named captures assigning to local variables — david@... 2007/12/19

Thank you for the clarification, akr. I'm embarassed to say that it didn't

[#14161] Re: named captures assigning to local variables — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/12/20

If I may, have a proposal. My apologies if this has already been

[#14170] Re: named captures assigning to local variables — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2007/12/20

In article <476A087E.3070000@davidflanagan.com>,

[#14172] Re: named captures assigning to local variables — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/12/20

How about making the return value an array of the captured strings, or nil

[#14149] Experimental PATCH to improve thread performance — Brent Roman <brent@...>

The attached patch against Ruby 1.8.6-p110 improves the performance of

38 messages 2007/12/19
[#14202] Re: Experimental PATCH to improve thread performance — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/21

Brent Roman wrote:

[#14257] Re: Experimental PATCH to improve thread performance — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2007/12/22

[#14266] Re: Experimental PATCH to improve thread performance — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/22

Brent Roman wrote:

[#14274] Re: Experimental PATCH to improve thread performance — Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...4x.org> 2007/12/22

On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 11:07:25PM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#14186] Rake 0.8.0 added to Ruby — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...>

Just a heads up here. I've added Rake (version 0.8.0 ... the latest)

34 messages 2007/12/21
[#14210] Re: [Spam] Rake 0.8.0 added to Ruby — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/12/21

Jim Weirich wrote:

[#14213] Re: [Spam] Rake 0.8.0 added to Ruby — "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale@...> 2007/12/21

On Dec 21, 2007 10:24 AM, Gonzalo Garramu=F1o <ggarra@advancedsl.com.ar> wr=

[#14215] Re: [Spam] Rake 0.8.0 added to Ruby — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...> 2007/12/21

[#14303] IRHG - GC Memory Fragmentation? — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

While working on Chapter 05 and referencing various works

23 messages 2007/12/23
[#14308] Re: IRHG - GC Memory Fragmentation? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2007/12/23

[#14335] Many external symbols _without_ prefix in libruby object file — Tadashi Saito <shiba@...2.accsnet.ne.jp>

Hi all,

12 messages 2007/12/23

[#14364] RDoc: [FATAL] failed to allocate memory — Martin Duerst <duerst@...>

With revision 14590, I suddenly get an error when I do "make install"

13 messages 2007/12/24

[#14367] replace csv.rb with fastercsv.rb — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>

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

15 messages 2007/12/24
[#14390] Re: replace csv.rb with fastercsv.rb — James Gray <james@...> 2007/12/24

On Dec 24, 2007, at 3:34 AM, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:

[#14418] Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0 — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>

Just re-built latest svn of 1.9.0 and base64.rb is removed. Its

51 messages 2007/12/25
[#14420] Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2007/12/25

On Dec 25, 2007, at 07:03 AM, Richard Kilmer wrote:

[#14427] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...> 2007/12/25

Eric Hodel wrote:

[#14431] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/25

[#14446] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2007/12/26

On Dec 25, 2007, at 13:35 PM, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#14452] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/26

[#14492] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2007/12/27

On Dec 26, 2007, at 06:16 AM, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#14494] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2007/12/27

[#14503] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Richard Kilmer <rich@...> 2007/12/27

[#14505] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/12/27

Richard Kilmer wrote:

[#14429] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — hemant <gethemant@...> 2007/12/25

On Dec 26, 2007 1:01 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:

[#14430] Re: Legacy support (Was: Base64 not there makes Rails 2.0.2 fail to load in 1.9.0) — "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...> 2007/12/25

hemant wrote:

[#14517] Invalid use of mktime() in Ruby 1.8/1.9 results in incorrect Time objects — Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink@...>

Hello,

12 messages 2007/12/27

[#14549] multibyte strings & bucket-of-bytes efficiency under 1.9.0 — khaines@...

Like everyone else, I've been testing my stuff under 1.9.0. In general,

38 messages 2007/12/28
[#14560] Re: multibyte strings & bucket-of-bytes efficiency under 1.9.0 — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2007/12/28

[#14573] Re: multibyte strings & bucket-of-bytes efficiency under 1.9.0 — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/12/29

Brent Roman wrote:

[#14603] Re: multibyte strings & bucket-of-bytes efficiency under 1.9.0 — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2007/12/30

[#14617] Re: multibyte strings & bucket-of-bytes efficiency under 1.9.0 — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2007/12/31

In article <14544702.post@talk.nabble.com>,

[#14568] Layout of includes in ruby 1.9 — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...>

19 messages 2007/12/29
[#14576] Re: Layout of includes in ruby 1.9 — "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale@...> 2007/12/29

On Dec 29, 2007 2:39 AM, Gonzalo Garramu=F1o <ggarra@advancedsl.com.ar> wro=

[#14569] Wide strings to ruby strings — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...>

11 messages 2007/12/29

[#14602] RCR allow indexing last n items — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...>

Hello

15 messages 2007/12/30
[#14609] Re: RCR allow indexing last n items — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2007/12/30

Hi --

[#14610] Re: RCR allow indexing last n items — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...> 2007/12/30

On 30/12/2007, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:

[#14616] Re: RCR allow indexing last n items — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2007/12/30

Hi --

[#14621] Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — murphy <murphy@...>

Hello!

21 messages 2007/12/31
[#14622] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — "Cheah Chu Yeow" <chuyeow@...> 2007/12/31

This looks like a related bug with passing block arguments to

[#14633] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — murphy <murphy@...> 2007/12/31

Cheah Chu Yeow wrote:

[#14716] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2008/01/03

Hi,

[#14726] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — ts <decoux@...> 2008/01/03

>>>>> "S" == SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> writes:

[#14728] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2008/01/03

Hi,

[#16093] Re: Module.new(&block) in Ruby 1.9 — "Jeremy Kemper" <jeremy@...> 2008/04/01

Hi,

crash on 1.9 when using class_eval on a string with a syntax error

From: Frederick Cheung <frederick.cheung@...>
Date: 2007-12-28 20:00:35 UTC
List: ruby-core #14556
It seems that in 1.9 (r14776) using class_eval on a string with a  
syntax error can cause a crash in certain cases instead of raising  
SyntaxError

The following crashes when ran in irb in 1.9 (or when run as part of  
the larger application I found this in):

class Foo
   def self.add_method
     class_eval("def some-bad-name; puts 'hello' unless  
@some_variable.some_function(''); end")
   end
end

Foo.add_method

If I paste it in a file and run that then the ruby process blocks  
using 100% cpu. In both cases if I make the call to some_function take  
no arguments then behaviour is the same as with 1.8 (ie raises  
SyntaxError).

Fred

Backtrace for when it did crash:

(irb):3: [BUG] Bus Error
ruby 1.9.0 (2007-12-29 revision 0) [i686-darwin9.1.0]

-- control frame ----------
c:0025 p:---- s:0076 b:0076 l:000075 d:000075 CFUNC  :class_eval
c:0024 p:0009 s:0072 b:0072 l:000071 d:000071 METHOD (irb):3
c:0023 p:0013 s:0069 b:0069 l:0007f4 d:000068 EVAL   (irb):6
c:0022 p:---- s:0068 b:0068 l:000067 d:000067 FINISH :empty?
c:0021 p:---- s:0066 b:0066 l:000065 d:000065 CFUNC  :eval
c:0020 p:0023 s:0059 b:0059 l:000058 d:000058 METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb/workspace.rb:81
c:0019 p:0025 s:0052 b:0051 l:000050 d:000050 METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb/context.rb:219
c:0018 p:0024 s:0046 b:0046 l:001084 d:000045 BLOCK  /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:150
c:0017 p:0024 s:0040 b:0040 l:000039 d:000039 METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:259
c:0016 p:0009 s:0035 b:0035 l:001084 d:000034 BLOCK  /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:147
c:0015 p:0091 s:0032 b:0032 l:000021 d:000031 BLOCK  /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:244
c:0014 p:---- s:0032 b:0032 l:000031 d:000031 FINISH :block_given?
c:0013 p:---- s:0030 b:0030 l:000029 d:000029 CFUNC  :loop
c:0012 p:0007 s:0027 b:0027 l:000021 d:000026 BLOCK  /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:231
c:0011 p:---- s:0028 b:0028 l:000027 d:000027 FINISH :each
c:0010 p:---- s:0026 b:0026 l:000025 d:000025 CFUNC  :catch
c:0009 p:0017 s:0022 b:0022 l:000021 d:000021 METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:230
c:0008 p:0034 s:0019 b:0019 l:001084 d:001084 METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:146
c:0007 p:0009 s:0016 b:0016 l:00090c d:000015 BLOCK  /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:70
c:0006 p:---- s:0017 b:0017 l:000016 d:000016 FINISH :(null)
c:0005 p:---- s:0015 b:0015 l:000014 d:000014 CFUNC  :catch
c:0004 p:0152 s:0011 b:0011 l:00090c d:00090c METHOD /usr/local/lib/ 
ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:69
c:0003 p:0033 s:0006 b:0006 l:000005 d:000005 TOP    /usr/local/bin/ 
irb-trunk:13
c:0002 p:---- s:0004 b:0004 l:000003 d:000003 FINISH :inherited
c:0001 p:0000 s:0002 b:0002 l:000001 d:000001 TOP    <dummy toplevel>: 
37644
---------------------------
DBG> : "(irb):3:in `add_method'"
DBG> : "(irb):6:in `irb_binding'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/workspace.rb:81:in `eval'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/workspace.rb:81:in `evaluate'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/context.rb:219:in `evaluate'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:150:in `block (2 levels) in  
eval_input'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:259:in `signal_status'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:147:in `block in eval_input'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:244:in `block (2  
levels) in each_top_level_statement'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:231:in `loop'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:231:in `block in  
each_top_level_statement'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:230:in `catch'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb/ruby-lex.rb:230:in  
`each_top_level_statement'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:146:in `eval_input'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:70:in `block in start'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:69:in `catch'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/lib/ruby/1.9.0/irb.rb:69:in `start'"
DBG> : "/usr/local/bin/irb-trunk:13:in `<main>'"
-- backtrace of native function call (Use addr2line) --
0xdb406
0x1b6fc
0x1b73b
0x98d7b
0x9007d97b
0xffffffff
0x16cd1
0x593f6
0x61732
0x6fea5
0xdd920
0x594ca
0x596a7
0xcb76f
0xcb867
0x24f8f
0x252d6
0x1fa6d
0x1fbaf
0xce4e5
0xd1890
0xd5724
0xd9a9c
0x2503f
0x253c6
0xce4e5
0xd1890
0xd5724
0xd9a9c
0xd105d
0x1eeea
0x1efa9
0x1f107
0xd1890
0xd5724
0xd9a9c
0xd105d
0x20bb4
0xce4e5
0xd1890
0xd5724
0xd9a9c
0xd105d
0x20bb4
0xce4e5
0xd1890
0xd5724
0xd9a9c
0xd9d69
0x1ebb4
0x2371a
0x229f
0x2206
-------------------------------------------------------
Abort trap



In This Thread

Prev Next