ruby-core

This makes it difficult to embed ruby in component framework applications (e.g. OpenOffice), since you can't be sure which thread instantiates your component.

[#15774] onenine.rb — Trans <transfire@...>

For the next version of Facets I broke out all the methods now

2 messages 2008/03/04

[#15790] Re: onenine.rb — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/03/05

A very minor suggestion: onenine is difficult to read. What about one_nine ?

[#15775] next(n), succ(n) ? — Trans <transfire@...>

Can anyone see any reason against adding an optional parameter to

6 messages 2008/03/04

[#15903] Re: next(n), succ(n) ? — Trans <transfire@...> 2008/03/14

[#15905] Re: next(n), succ(n) ? — "Yemi I. D. Bedu" <yemi@...> 2008/03/14

Hello,

[#15906] Re: next(n), succ(n) ? — Chris Cummer <chris@...> 2008/03/14

On 14-Mar-08, at 9:25 AM, Trans wrote:

[#15908] Re: next(n), succ(n) ? — Trans <transfire@...> 2008/03/14

[#15776] Re: next(n), succ(n) ? — Trans <transfire@...> 2008/03/04

[#15778] Named captures and regular captures — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

It seems that once you have a named capture in a regular expression,

5 messages 2008/03/04

[#15779] Re: Named captures and regular captures — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2008/03/04

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15780] Re: Named captures and regular captures — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/04

[#15781] Re: Named captures and regular captures — Charles Thornton <ceo@...> 2008/03/04

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15782] Re: Named captures and regular captures — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/04

[#15783] Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>

Hi all,

15 messages 2008/03/04

[#15784] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...> 2008/03/04

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#15798] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/05

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#15799] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/05

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:40AM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#15800] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/05

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#15812] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/06

On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:42:04AM +0900, Phlip wrote:

[#15813] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/06

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#15818] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/03/07

[#15801] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2008/03/05

> -----Original Message-----

[#15785] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/04

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#15786] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...> 2008/03/04

Phlip wrote:

[#15787] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/04

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#15788] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — "Farrel Lifson" <farrel.lifson@...> 2008/03/04

On 05/03/2008, Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:

[#15789] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2008/03/04

> -----Original Message-----

[#15791] Re: Adding startup and shutdown to Test::Unit — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/05

>> Would it not be better to have a startup and shutdown method

[#15802] Just wondering about mod_freeze() — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

static VALUE

2 messages 2008/03/05

[#15803] Re: Just wondering about mod_freeze() — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/05

Hi,

[#15804] Ruby 1.9.0-1 snapshot released — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

Hi,

1 message 2008/03/05

[#15805] Bugs overview — "Jano Svitok" <jan.svitok@...>

Hi,

1 message 2008/03/05

[#15808] Defect for the signal usage of SIGVTALRM in Ruby 1.9 implementation — "Chirag Mistry" <chirag80bece@...>

Hi All

2 messages 2008/03/06

[#15811] Re: Defect for the signal usage of SIGVTALRM in Ruby 1.9 implementation — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/06

Hi,

[#15809] defect for the signal usage of SIGINT in Ruby 1.9 implementation — "Chirag Mistry" <chirag80bece@...>

Hi All

2 messages 2008/03/06

[#15819] Re: defect for the signal usage of SIGINT in Ruby 1.9 implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/07

Hi,

[#15810] IRHG -- Untranslated Header: <h3>???????</h3> — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

Need Translation of "<h3>???????</h3>" for IRHG.

3 messages 2008/03/06

[#15834] Re: IRHG -- Untranslated Header: <h3>???????</h3> — "Wilson Bilkovich" <wilsonb@...> 2008/03/08

On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:04 AM, Charles Thornton

[#15854] Re: IRHG -- Untranslated Header: <h3>???????</h3> — Charles Thornton <ceo@...> 2008/03/11

Wilson Bilkovich wrote:

[#15814] Improved documentation for mkmf — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net>

Hi.

1 message 2008/03/06

[#15815] IRHG -- Another Attempt to Send Japanese Header! — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

3 messages 2008/03/07

[#15816] Re: IRHG -- Another Attempt to Send Japanese Header! — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/07

Hi,

[#15817] Re: IRHG -- Another Attempt to Send Japanese Header! — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...> 2008/03/07

fa i na ra i za -> finalizer

[#15825] irb — ts <decoux@...>

1 message 2008/03/07

[#15833] Module#dup — ts <decoux@...>

1 message 2008/03/08

[#15835] TimeoutError in core, timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...>

I've been reworking JRuby's stdlib to improve performance and fix

10 messages 2008/03/09

[#15847] timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/10

On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 12:13 +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#15851] Re: [PATCH] timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/11

Hi,

[#15852] Re: [PATCH] timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/11

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 10:56 +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15853] Re: [PATCH] timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/11

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:56 +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#15858] Re: [PATCH] timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/11

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 12:56 +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#15836] Re: [RFC] TimeoutError in core, timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/09

On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 12:13 +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:

[#15843] Re: [RFC] TimeoutError in core, timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/10

Hi,

[#15844] Re: [RFC] TimeoutError in core, timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/10

On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 13:38 +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15868] Re: [RFC] TimeoutError in core, timeouts for ConditionVariable#wait — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/12

n Mon, 2008-03-10 at 13:38 +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15837] Correct procedure for patch review? — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net>

Hi.

5 messages 2008/03/09

[#15841] Re: Correct procedure for patch review? — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/03/10

Hello Hongli,

[#15845] Re: Correct procedure for patch review? — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net> 2008/03/10

Martin Duerst wrote:

[#15842] Re: Correct procedure for patch review? — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/10

Hi,

[#15846] Re: Correct procedure for patch review? — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net> 2008/03/10

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15838] Bug in Fixnum#& with respect to coercion into a bignum — Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink@...>

Hello all,

4 messages 2008/03/09

[#15840] Re: Bug in Fixnum#& with respect to coercion into a bignum — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/10

Hi,

[#15859] Re: Bug in Fixnum#& with respect to coercion into a bignum — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/11

Hi,

[#15839] Re: Bug in Fixnum#& with respect to coercion into a bignum — Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink@...> 2008/03/09

[#15848] What's the current state of * and/or to_a? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>

Hi --

3 messages 2008/03/10

[#15849] Re: What's the current state of * and/or to_a? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2008/03/11

On Tue, 2008-03-11 at 08:40 +0900, David A. Black wrote:

[#15850] Re: What's the current state of * and/or to_a? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2008/03/11

Hi --

[#15855] Ruby 1.8.6 trace return line numbers wrong — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>

Consider this program:

4 messages 2008/03/11

[#15864] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 trace return line numbers wrong — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/12

Hi,

[#15869] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 trace return line numbers wrong — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...> 2008/03/12

I tried the patch out. It works great! And it seems to match what's done on

[#15872] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 trace return line numbers wrong — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/12

Hi,

[#15856] Ruby on GPU — "Jordi Polo" <mumismo@...>

Maybe this mail is more ruby-talk material...

3 messages 2008/03/11

[#15857] Re: Ruby on GPU — "Jason Roelofs" <jameskilton@...> 2008/03/11

I think you're misunderstanding what PyGPU does. PyGPU is simply a

[#15989] Re: Ruby on GPU — "Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso" <grabber@...> 2008/03/23

You can try re-write PyGPU in Ruby. But it does not make sense to me.

[#15860] Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Jos Backus <jos@...>

DSecRG Advisory #DSECRG-08-026 aka -018 describes a remote directory traversal

7 messages 2008/03/11

[#15861] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2008/03/11

Hi,

[#15863] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/03/11

[#15866] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2008/03/12

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 07:36:54AM +0900, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:

[#15867] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2008/03/12

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 07:36:54AM +0900, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:

[#15862] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — "Wilson Bilkovich" <wilsonb@...> 2008/03/11

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Jos Backus <jos@catnook.com> wrote:

[#15865] Re: Webrick directory traversal exploit on UNIX — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2008/03/12

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 07:55:36AM +0900, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:

[#15871] Sparc architecture optimizations — Thomas Enebo <Thomas.Enebo@...>

Someone at Sun has been looking at Ruby on Sparc:

10 messages 2008/03/12

[#15959] Re: Sparc architecture optimizations — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2008/03/19

Thomas Enebo wrote:

[#16159] SPARC architecture optimizations — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2008/04/04

Hello Ruby-core,

[#16265] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/04/08

Hi,

[#16285] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2008/04/08

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#16396] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/04/15

Prashant Srinivasan wrote:

[#16443] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2008/04/18

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#16445] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/04/19

Prashant Srinivasan wrote:

[#16530] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2008/04/23

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#16536] Re: [PATCH] SPARC architecture optimizations — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/04/23

Prashant Srinivasan wrote:

[#15877] Ruby1.9 Bug Report #18790 — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi list

1 message 2008/03/12

[#15880] Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>

Here's another trace hook weirdness that I've encountered.

6 messages 2008/03/13

[#15883] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Yemi I. D. Bedu" <yemi@...> 2008/03/13

Hello,

[#15884] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...> 2008/03/13

Thanks. The output you report matches what I get in 1.8.6 and suggests where

[#15889] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...> 2008/03/14

I think I've found why this is happening. The trace hook for NODE_IF is

[#15890] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...> 2008/03/14

A slightly shorter patch by sinking common code:

[#15891] Re: Ruby 1.8.6 binding value after "if" expression evaluation — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...> 2008/03/14

Actually, probably the sunk code isn't as precise because we probably want

[#15885] IRHG - GC and threads — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

OK Guys,

2 messages 2008/03/13

[#15888] Re: IRHG - GC and threads — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/13

Hi,

[#15886] IRHG - GC and Threads - one more question — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

GC runs a system level - right!

1 message 2008/03/13

[#15887] IRHG - Abort Threads? — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

Why is rb_gc_abort_threads() run at the completion of marking?

2 messages 2008/03/13

[#15894] Re: IRHG - Abort Threads? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/14

[#15899] IRHG - Proc End Objects — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

I have not dived into EVAL.C as of yet

1 message 2008/03/14

[#15907] Range#member? semantics seem wrong — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Range#member? has been changed so that it the start and end of the

6 messages 2008/03/14

[#15935] Re: Range#member? semantics seem wrong — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/18

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15946] Re: Range#member? semantics seem wrong — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/18

[#15951] Re: Range#member? semantics seem wrong — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/18

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15952] Re: Range#member? semantics seem wrong — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/18

[#15944] Re: Range#member? semantics seem wrong — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/18

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 05:28:40AM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15909] RARRAY_PTR — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...>

Hi,

6 messages 2008/03/15

[#15910] Re: RARRAY_PTR — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/15

Hi,

[#15911] Re: RARRAY_PTR — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...> 2008/03/15

Hi,

[#15912] Re: RARRAY_PTR — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/15

Hi,

[#15914] Re: RARRAY_PTR — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...> 2008/03/15

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#15916] Re: RARRAY_PTR — Evan Phoenix <evan@...> 2008/03/16

I second this idea. In fact, Laurent and I have discussed this kind of

[#15915] Patch for ruby-mode.el: Use run-mode-hooks instead of run-hooks — "Chiyuan Zhang" <pluskid@...>

Hi, Matz:

3 messages 2008/03/16

[#15921] Re: Patch for ruby-mode.el: Use run-mode-hooks instead of run-hooks — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/17

Hi,

[#15941] Re: Patch for ruby-mode.el: Use run-mode-hooks instead of run-hooks — "Chiyuan Zhang" <pluskid@...> 2008/03/18

Yeah! In fact, I encounter this problem when writing the

[#15917] Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net>

Ruby 1.9 (trunk) seems to crash when running the supplied RubyGems and Rake:

7 messages 2008/03/16

[#15919] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/17

Hi,

[#15922] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net> 2008/03/17

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15923] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/17

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 06:53:19PM +0900, Hongli Lai wrote:

[#15925] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net> 2008/03/17

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#15926] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/17

>>>>> "H" == Hongli Lai <hongli@plan99.net> writes:

[#15929] Re: Ruby 1.9 (trunk) crashes when running RubyGems and Rake — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net> 2008/03/17

ts wrote:

[#15918] make sure version numbers can be determined — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...>

Hi,

2 messages 2008/03/16

[#15920] Re: [PATCH] make sure version numbers can be determined — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/17

Hi,

[#15924] IRHG -- Depreciated Methods add_finalizer and remove_finalizer Problems — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

The depreciated methods

1 message 2008/03/17

[#15927] how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...>

This works in Ruby (1.9):

8 messages 2008/03/17

[#15928] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/17

>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:

[#15930] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/17

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 12:29:07AM +0900, ts wrote:

[#15931] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/17

>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:

[#17143] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2008/06/08

Hi,

[#18404] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/08/27

On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:25:32AM +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:

[#18430] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/09/01

Hi,

[#18440] Re: how to create a block with a block parameter in C? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/09/02

On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 10:16:45AM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#15932] Bug in Thread.set_trace_func — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

@@ -2904,7 +2904,7 @@

1 message 2008/03/18

[#15933] complex and rational — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Before I start doing the documentation for the PickAxe, could I just

5 messages 2008/03/18

[#15934] Re: complex and rational — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/18

Hi,

[#15943] Re: complex and rational — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/18

[#15945] Re: complex and rational — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/18

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:38:55PM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15949] Re: complex and rational — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/18

[#15936] Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

In Working on IRHG Docs for GC the following

6 messages 2008/03/18

[#15937] Re: Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/18

>>>>> "C" == Charles Thornton <ceo@hawthorne-press.com> writes:

[#15939] Re: Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — Charles Thornton <ceo@...> 2008/03/18

ts wrote:

[#15940] Re: Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/18

>>>>> "C" == Charles Thornton <ceo@hawthorne-press.com> writes:

[#15942] Re: Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — Charles Thornton <ceo@...> 2008/03/18

ts wrote:

[#15947] Re: Are Depreciated Methods "add_final" & "remove_final" supposed to ACTUALLY WORK? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/18

Hi,

[#15938] Questions on Enumerator#skip_first and Enumerable#first — "Artem Voroztsov" <artem.voroztsov@...>

I asked in ruby-talk, but did not get answer.

4 messages 2008/03/18

[#15948] Re: Questions on Enumerator#skip_first and Enumerable#first — James Gray <james@...> 2008/03/18

On Mar 18, 2008, at 6:20 AM, Artem Voroztsov wrote:

[#15950] Re: Questions on Enumerator#skip_first and Enumerable#first — "Artem Voroztsov" <artem.voroztsov@...> 2008/03/18

2008/3/18, James Gray <james@grayproductions.net>:

[#15953] Re: Questions on Enumerator#skip_first and Enumerable#first — "Artem Voroztsov" <artem.voroztsov@...> 2008/03/18

I remember Matz talked about LazyArray's in Ruby 2.0

[#15954] REXML in patch 1.8.6 patch 111 and 1.9.0 — "Will Sobel" <will.sobel@...>

The version of REXML in 1.8.6 patch 111 and 1.9.0 are broken.

3 messages 2008/03/18

[#15955] Re: REXML in patch 1.8.6 patch 111 and 1.9.0 — "Jano Svitok" <jan.svitok@...> 2008/03/18

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Will Sobel <will.sobel@gmail.com> wrote:

[#15956] Re: REXML in patch 1.8.6 patch 111 and 1.9.0 — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/19

Will Sobel wrote:

[#15957] Two questions on Encoding#dummy — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

First, is this description about right?

3 messages 2008/03/19

[#15958] Re: Two questions on Encoding#dummy — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/19

Hi,

[#15961] Re: Two questions on Encoding#dummy — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/19

[#15960] Dir#inspect — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...>

Hi,

1 message 2008/03/19

[#15962] update URI to reflect RFC 3986 ? — Jeremy Hinegardner <jeremy@...>

Hi all,

1 message 2008/03/19

[#15968] IRHG - Input needed on alternative GC implementations — Charles Thornton <ceo@...>

Dear Core,

1 message 2008/03/20

[#15973] fixing test/unit --name — "Laurent Sansonetti" <laurent.sansonetti@...>

Hi,

3 messages 2008/03/21

[#15974] Re: [PATCH] fixing test/unit --name — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/03/21

[#16062] Re: [PATCH] fixing test/unit --name — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/28

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 04:54:53AM +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:

[#15975] Bugs in REXML — "Federico Builes" <federico.builes@...>

Hi,

8 messages 2008/03/21

[#15976] Re: Bugs in REXML — "Federico Builes" <federico.builes@...> 2008/03/21

On 3/21/08, Federico Builes <federico.builes@gmail.com> wrote:

[#15982] Re: Bugs in REXML — mathew <meta@...> 2008/03/22

On Mar 21, 2008, at 17:35, Federico Builes wrote:

[#15984] Re: Bugs in REXML — "Federico Builes" <federico.builes@...> 2008/03/22

On 3/22/08, mathew <meta@pobox.com> wrote:

[#15988] Re: Bugs in REXML — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/03/23

At 05:30 08/03/23, mathew wrote:

[#15994] Re: Bugs in REXML — "Federico Builes" <federico.builes@...> 2008/03/23

On 3/23/08, Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> wrote:

[#15999] Re: Bugs in REXML — Sam Ruby <rubys@...> 2008/03/24

Federico Builes wrote:

[#16000] Re: Bugs in REXML — "Federico Builes" <federico.builes@...> 2008/03/24

On 3/23/08, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

[#15980] 1.8.6 memory leak? — "Stephen Sykes" <sdsykes@...>

Hi,

5 messages 2008/03/22

[#15995] Re: 1.8.6 memory leak? — "Stephen Sykes" <sdsykes@...> 2008/03/23

By the way, I also have a valgrind trace of this leak. Running with

[#15996] Re: 1.8.6 memory leak? — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...> 2008/03/23

Hi Stephen,

[#16008] Re: 1.8.6 memory leak? — "Stephen Sykes" <sdsykes@...> 2008/03/24

Thanks Vladimir, that's interesting (particularly about Rubinius).

[#16018] Re: 1.8.6 memory leak? — "Stephen Sykes" <sdsykes@...> 2008/03/26

Incidentally, I believe this to also be the same issue as reported

[#15981] Evaluation order of block pass versus arguments — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>

I was writing up some specs for evaluation order today and discovered

2 messages 2008/03/22

[#15987] Re: Evaluation order of block pass versus arguments — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/03/23

Sorry, I realized there's no call for action here. Can we get an

[#15983] Changing the algorithm of String#* — apeiros <apeiros@...>

Hi there

6 messages 2008/03/22

[#16001] Re: Changing the algorithm of String#* — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/24

Hi,

[#16002] Re: Changing the algorithm of String#* — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/03/24

At 17:29 08/03/24, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#16007] Re: Changing the algorithm of String#* — apeiros <apeiros@...> 2008/03/24

Am 24.03.2008 um 10:17 schrieb Martin Duerst:

[#16005] Re: Changing the algorithm of String#* — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2008/03/24

In article <E1JdhWd-0004oI-T1@x61.netlab.jp>,

[#16545] Re: Changing the algorithm of String#* — apeiros <apeiros@...> 2008/04/23

Am 24.03.2008 um 09:29 schrieb Yukihiro Matsumoto:

[#15985] 1.9 and 1.8.6: Fixnum#gcd(Fixnum) improves performance of Date, Rational. — Kurt Stephens <ks@...>

Can this be added to 1.8.7 and trunk?

1 message 2008/03/23

[#15986] wrong sitearch definition for MinGW builds — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...>

Hello List,

2 messages 2008/03/23

[#15998] Re: wrong sitearch definition for MinGW builds — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/24

Hi,

[#15990] Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...>

Hi,

35 messages 2008/03/23

[#15991] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/23

[#15992] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/03/23

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#15993] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...> 2008/03/23

Hi Dave,

[#15997] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/23

[#16024] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...> 2008/03/26

Hi Dave,

[#16025] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16026] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16027] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16029] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16030] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16031] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16032] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...> 2008/03/26

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Dave Thomas <dave@pragprog.com> wrote:

[#16033] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16034] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16035] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16041] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/26

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#16042] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16043] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/26

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#16044] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

[#16045] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/27

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#16046] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/27

[#16050] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/27

Dave,

[#16052] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Daniel DeLorme <dan-ml@...42.com> 2008/03/27

This is all a semantic problem. Different people have different

[#16055] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/03/28

Daniel DeLorme wrote:

[#16060] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — David Flanagan <david@...> 2008/03/28

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#16061] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/28

[#16056] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2008/03/28

Charles Oliver Nutter schrieb:

[#16053] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/28

[#16074] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale@...> 2008/03/30

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:38 PM, Dave Thomas <dave@pragprog.com> wrote:

[#16036] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Gavin Kistner" <gavin.kistner@...> 2008/03/26

From: Dave Thomas [mailto:dave@pragprog.com]

[#16038] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16040] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Gavin Kistner" <gavin.kistner@...> 2008/03/26

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto [mailto:matz@ruby-lang.org]

[#16039] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/03/26

Gabon:

[#16028] Re: Recent changes in Range#step behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...> 2008/03/26

HI,

[#16009] (Somewhat) undocumented Change in Ruby 1.9: Module#constants returns Symbols instead of Strings — Florian Gilcher <flo@...>

Hi,

2 messages 2008/03/25

[#16019] Re: (Somewhat) undocumented Change in Ruby 1.9: Module#constants returns Symbols instead of Strings — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16010] #defined? — ts <decoux@...>

3 messages 2008/03/25

[#16376] Re: #defined? — ts <decoux@...> 2008/04/13

ts wrote:

[#16382] Re: #defined? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/04/14

Hi,

[#16011] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...>

Hi folks,

11 messages 2008/03/25

[#16012] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/25

On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Marc Haisenko wrote:

[#16013] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — "Jason Roelofs" <jameskilton@...> 2008/03/25

ERb already does this:

[#16014] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/25

On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Jason Roelofs wrote:

[#16015] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — "Jason Roelofs" <jameskilton@...> 2008/03/25

On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Marc Haisenko <haisenko@comdasys.com> wrote:

[#16016] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/25

On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Jason Roelofs wrote:

[#16017] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/25

Marc Haisenko wrote:

[#16020] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/26

On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Phlip wrote:

[#16021] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Phlip <phlip2005@...> 2008/03/26

Marc Haisenko wrote:

[#16022] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/26

On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Phlip wrote:

[#16054] Re: [PATCH] New ERb mode — Florian Gilcher <flo@...> 2008/03/28

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

[#16023] some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Chris Shea <cmshea@...>

All,

10 messages 2008/03/26

[#16037] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/26

Hi,

[#16047] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/27

Hi,

[#16049] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/27

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 02:26:51PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#16068] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/29

Hi,

[#16086] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/03/31

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#16087] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/31

Hi,

[#16103] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/04/01

On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 03:27:51AM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#16109] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/04/02

Hi,

[#16048] Re: some Enumerable methods slower in 1.9 on OS X after revision 15124 — ts <decoux@...> 2008/03/27

>>>>> "N" == Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> writes:

[#16051] REXML in 1.8.6 p114 — "Michael Klishin" <michael.s.klishin.lists@...>

In REXML in 1.8.6 p114 call site to

2 messages 2008/03/27

[#16332] Re: REXML in 1.8.6 p114 — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2008/04/11

On Thursday 27 March 2008, Michael Klishin wrote:

[#16057] About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — "XiaoLiang Liu" <liuxlsh@...>

Hello everyone,

7 messages 2008/03/28

[#16083] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — "XiaoLiang Liu" <liuxlsh@...> 2008/03/31

Can anyone help me on this?

[#16084] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — "Meinrad Recheis" <meinrad.recheis@...> 2008/03/31

I'd read it like this: freeware means no license attached.

[#16091] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — Corey Jewett <ml@...> 2008/03/31

[#16095] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — James Tucker <jftucker@...> 2008/04/01

[#16096] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — "XiaoLiang Liu" <liuxlsh@...> 2008/04/01

Thank you very much for your info :-)

[#16085] Re: About the license of gserver.rb being "freeware"? — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...> 2008/03/31

On Monday 31 March 2008, XiaoLiang Liu wrote:

[#16058] Re: Why Ruby do not optimize code at all? — "Jason Roelofs" <jameskilton@...>

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Jason Roelofs <jameskilton@gmail.com> wrote:

2 messages 2008/03/28

[#16059] Re: Why Ruby do not optimize code at all? — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2008/03/28

We can redefine Fixnum#* in Ruby.

[#16063] CI notifications (again) for good of RubySpec — "Michael Klishin" <michael.s.klishin.lists@...>

I know CI topic is a sea sailed for ruby-core but anyway. Spec suite

1 message 2008/03/28

[#16064] CI notifications (again) for good of RubySpec — "Michael Klishin" <michael.s.klishin.lists@...>

I know CI topic is a sea sailed for ruby-core but anyway. Spec suite

1 message 2008/03/28

[#16065] re-entrant ruby_exec() or ruby_run_node() ? — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...>

Hello,

2 messages 2008/03/29

[#16072] Re: re-entrant ruby_exec() or ruby_run_node() ? — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...> 2008/03/29

Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:

[#16071] expose ruby_init_gems() in <ruby.h> for Ruby 1.9 — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...>

Hello,

1 message 2008/03/29

[#16073] Has Rational.new! intentionally been made private? — "Philip Ross" <phil.ross@...>

The recent changes to implement Rational as a built-in C class have

3 messages 2008/03/30

[#16075] Re: Has Rational.new! intentionally been made private? — "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...> 2008/03/30

Philip Ross wrote:

[#16076] Re: Has Rational.new! intentionally been made private? — Philip Ross <phil.ross@...> 2008/03/30

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

[#16077] String#dump vs String#inspect — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...>

Hi,

2 messages 2008/03/30

[#16081] Re: String#dump vs String#inspect — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2008/03/31

Hi,

[#16078] C extension - how to print exception like Ruby? — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...>

Hello,

2 messages 2008/03/30

[#16079] Re: C extension - how to print exception like Ruby? — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...> 2008/03/30

Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:

[#16080] Latest Ruby 1.9 SVN Head - Make check loop — Tommy Nordgren <tommy.nordgren@...>

There appears to be an infinite loop in Make check with the latest svn

1 message 2008/03/30

[#16082] The future of VM::InstructionSequence — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>

A while back in The future of

1 message 2008/03/31

[#16088] command_call in parse.y — Adrian Thurston <thurston@...>

Hi,

6 messages 2008/03/31

[#16092] Re: command_call in parse.y — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2008/03/31

On Mar 31, 2008, at 14:50 PM, Adrian Thurston wrote:

[#16108] Re: command_call in parse.y — Adrian Thurston <thurston@...> 2008/04/01

Thanks. It would be really nice if I could make use of that test suite.

[#16113] Re: command_call in parse.y — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/04/02

[#16089] Re: command_call in parse.y — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/31

Hi,

[#16090] Re: command_call in parse.y — Adrian Thurston <thurston@...> 2008/03/31

Ah, I see the ambiguity that would create.