[#15707] Schedule for the 1.8.7 release — "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>

Hi, developers,

21 messages 2008/03/01

[#15740] Copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net>

Hi.

31 messages 2008/03/03
[#15742] Re: Copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/03

Hi,

[#15829] Re: Copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — Daniel DeLorme <dan-ml@...42.com> 2008/03/08

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#15756] embedding Ruby 1.9.0 inside pthread — "Suraj Kurapati" <sunaku@...>

Hello,

18 messages 2008/03/03
[#15759] Re: embedding Ruby 1.9.0 inside pthread — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/03/04

Hi,

[#15760] Re: embedding Ruby 1.9.0 inside pthread — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/03/04

Hi,

[#15762] Re: embedding Ruby 1.9.0 inside pthread — "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sunaku@...> 2008/03/04

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

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

Hi all,

15 messages 2008/03/04

[#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

[#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

[#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

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

Dave Thomas wrote:

Re: Ruby 1.8.6 trace return line numbers wrong

From: "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>
Date: 2008-03-12 11:11:23 UTC
List: ruby-core #15869
I tried the patch out. It works great! And it seems to match what's done on
a C-RETURN.

Shouldn't the same things be done with on NODE_BMETHOD?

Thanks.

Index: eval.c
===================================================================
--- eval.c    (revision 15753)
+++ eval.c    (working copy)
@@ -5891,7 +5891,7 @@
     }
     result = proc_invoke(body->nd_cval, rb_ary_new4(argc, argv), recv,
klass);
     if (event_hooks) {
-        EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, body, recv, id, klass);
+        EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, ruby_current_node, recv, id,
klass);
     }
     break;

@@ -6014,7 +6014,7 @@
         }
         POP_TAG();
         if (event_hooks) {
-        EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, body, recv, id, klass);
+               EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, ruby_current_node, recv,
id, klass);
         }
         POP_VARS();
         POP_CLASS();


On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:30:28 +0900,
> Rocky Bernstein wrote in [ruby-core:15855]:
> > Notice that we give a *line* trace for line 3 but the *return *line
> number
> > which follows that goes back to line 2.
>
> It yielded the first line of the method.  Although it's
> difficult to yield the exact line number at `end', but easy for
> the last executed line.  Considering the case using return,
> this might be better.
>
>
> Index: eval.c
> ===================================================================
> --- eval.c      (revision 15746)
> +++ eval.c      (working copy)
> @@ -6015,5 +6015,5 @@ rb_call0(klass, recv, id, oid, argc, arg
>            POP_TAG();
>            if (event_hooks) {
> -               EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, body, recv, id, klass);
> +               EXEC_EVENT_HOOK(RUBY_EVENT_RETURN, ruby_current_node,
> recv, id, klass);
>            }
>            POP_VARS();
>
>
> --
> Nobu Nakada
>
>

In This Thread