[#17480] Array#fill behavior — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...>
Hi,
[#17488] HOME and USERPROFILE aliasing under Windows — "John Lam (IRONRUBY)" <jflam@...>
MRI currently expects the HOME environment variable to be set under Windows=
[#17491] [Ruby 1.8.7 - Bug #213] (Open) Different ERB behavior across versions — Federico Builes <redmine@...>
Issue #213 has been reported by Federico Builes.
[#17503] Possible misbehaviour in mkmf.rb package — S駻gio Durigan J佖ior <sergiodj@...>
Hello all,
On Wednesday 02 July 2008, S駻gio Durigan J佖ior wrote:
[#17509] YAML in Ruby — Trans <transfire@...>
Might we ever imagine a time when YAML is an integral part of Ruby?
[#17518] [Ruby 1.8 - Bug #216] (Open) Memory leaks in 1.8.6p230 and p238 — Igal Koshevoy <redmine@...>
Issue #216 has been reported by Igal Koshevoy.
[#17566] rubychecker - runs checks on a Ruby interpreter — Igal Koshevoy <igal@...>
I've put together a shell script that runs checks on a Ruby interpreter.
Why not write it in ruby?
Kurt Stephens wrote:
I've split up the code of rubychecker. One git repo has the GNU Bash
[#17574] rubyspec reports for ruby_1_8, ruby_1_8_7, and v1_8_6_p265 — Stephen Bannasch <stephen.bannasch@...>
I wanted to learn more about specs recently started using git and so
Stephen Bannasch wrote:
[#17595] Crashes and hangups on latest 1_8 branch — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...>
Hi,
[#17609] [PATCH] Fix Makefile update-rubyspec task — Gaston Ramos <ramos.gaston@...>
Hi, I'm trying to run rubyspec tests on 1.8 branch and get this error:
[#17615] [PATCH] ruby-mode.el: Fix here-doc strings with inner quotes — Nathan Weizenbaum <nex342@...>
At the moment, ruby-mode.el uses font-lock-keywords as opposed to
It was designed to fix the following case:
Here's a third patch that fixes a bug in the second and uses a quicker
One more patch which fixes a few bugs in the the last one.
Hi,
Looks like version 22 doesn't support explicitly numbered regexp groups.
Hi,
Hi,
Alright, here's a version that fixes both the highlighting bug and the
Hi,
Are you asking me? If so, go right ahead. Also, for posterity's sake,
One more bugfix.
Hi,
[#17627] ncurses-specific functions in ruby's curses — "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...>
Is it possible to add ncurses-specific functions to curses ruby module?
On Sunday 06 July 2008, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:25:42AM +0200, Marc Haisenko wrote:
On Monday 07 July 2008, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
[#17629] Proper exception out of throw? — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...>
Hi,
[#17644] Features to be included in Ruby 1.9.1 — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...>
Hi, all
Dave Thomas wrote:
There are two things I would like to see added to 1.9.1. A one-byte
Hi,
Hi,
In article <E1KGF2L-0000Qx-K5@x61.netlab.jp>,
Hi,
[#17674] [Ruby 1.8 - Bug #238] (Open) Ruby doesn't respect the Windows read-only flag — Jim Deville <redmine@...>
Issue #238 has been reported by Jim Deville.
[#17690] [Ruby 1.8 - Feature #249] (Open) wish list item: binding.set_local_variable — Roger Pack <redmine@...>
Issue #249 has been reported by Roger Pack.
[#17694] Mark functions not called on exit — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>
Hi everyone,
Hi,
[#17699] Omissions on the ruby-lang.org website and in redmine — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...>
As far as I can tell, there's nowhere on the ruby-lang.org website
On Jul 9, 2008, at 8:05 AM, Austin Ziegler wrote:
On Jul 9, 2008, at 6:07 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 5:14 PM, James Gray <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
[#17708] [Ruby 1.8 - Bug #252] (Open) Array#sort doesn't respect overridden <=> — Ryan Davis <redmine@...>
Issue #252 has been reported by Ryan Davis.
Issue #252 has been updated by Vladimir Sizikov.
Hi,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#17759] Ruby 1.9.1 Feature and 1.9.0-3 release plan — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...>
Thank you for your replies to [ruby-core:17644]. < all
[#17785] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #277] (Open) 1.9/trunk: build broken in ruby/ruby.h — Ollivier Robert <redmine@...>
Issue #277 has been reported by Ollivier Robert.
[#17812] Tracing versus coverage (was Re: Re: Features to be included in Ruby 1.9.1) — "Rocky Bernstein" <rocky.bernstein@...>
Sorry for not noticing sooner. It occurs to me that the built-in
It seems to me what you need is not a coverage system but a general hook
I just looked at the code to set the coverage hash and it seems to
Hi Rocky,
[#17822] rdoc defines Hash#method_missing — "Yusuke ENDOH" <mame@...>
Hi,
[#17829] FAILURE of "expand_path" — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
Core,
C.E. Thornton wrote:
Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 04:27:09AM +0900, C.E. Thornton wrote:
[#17833] Object allocation tracking — Christopher Thompson <cthompson@...>
Please excuse the blog spam.
[#17843] Exapand_path Patch good as stands. — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
Core,
[#17865] Expand_Path: New Patch - Modified Processing — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
Core,
Hi,
Hi,
[#17871] duping the NilClass — "Nasir Khan" <rubylearner@...>
While nil is an object, calling dup on it causes TypeError. This doesnt seem
Nasir Khan wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>
Meinrad Recheis wrote:
Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
I write a lot of hand crafted dup or clone because I want control as well as
Hi --
+1 to David. A convenient way to do Marshal idiom should be a new
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi --
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 1:02 PM, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:
Hi --
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 5:18 PM, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:
[#17883] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #340] (Open) 1.9/trunk does not work when compiled with llvm-gcc4 2.3 (gcc 4.2.1) — Ollivier Robert <redmine@...>
Issue #340 has been reported by Ollivier Robert.
[#17915] select returning an enumerator — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
[#17922] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #345] (Open) 1.9 racc appears to seg fault — Roger Pack <redmine@...>
Issue #345 has been reported by Roger Pack.
[#17943] RUBY_ENGINE? — "Vladimir Sizikov" <vsizikov@...>
Hi,
In article <3454c9680807241200xf7cc766qb987905a3987bb78@mail.gmail.com>,
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
Hi,
In article <3454c9680807250054i70db563duf44b42d92ba41bfb@mail.gmail.com>,
On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
Hi,
Since this thread seemed to die out, I'll ask again:
Hi,
Hi all.
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#17954] Expand_path -- Proposal: An alternate method — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
HI,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#17973] Proposal of GC::Profiler — Narihiro Nakamura <authorNari@...>
Hi.
On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 23:59 +0900, Narihiro Nakamura wrote:
[#18016] Re: Hex string literals [Patch] — gdefty@...
Before posting the message below I thought long
[#18029] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #378] (Open) rbconfig.rb:173: [BUG] Stack consistency error — Anonymous <redmine@...>
Issue #378 has been reported by Anonymous.
[#18033] JRuby adding ConcurrencyError for fatal concurrent modification — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
In order to limit or reduce the likelihood that multiple threads
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[ruby-core:17605] Re: 1.8 release management
Vladimir Sizikov wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Igal Koshevoy <igal@pragmaticraft.com> wrote: > >> Since then, Federico, Arthur, Vladamir and others have >> reworked most of those problematic guard conditions, but it's still >> necessary to read beyond the diffs and understand what the passing/failings >> specs actually mean. >> > > With the very latest RubySpec revision, Arthur and Federico managed to > bring the number of spec failures for 1.8.6 and 1.8.7 HEADS to ZERO > (on MacOS), and there are only 2 spec failures (IO failures only seen > on Linux). > Awesome, good work. I reran the tests against ruby_1_8_6 HEAD and am only seeing just those two failures. Previously there were errors in Iconv, Module#remove_method raises, and String#%. Now these are all passing. I'm a bit unclear on the meaning of the current specs. Are they passing because (1) Shyouhei and the Ruby team have made fixes, (2) the RubySpec team fixed problematic guards, or (3) the RubySpec team added guards to specify expected failures for this current release? What I'm really trying to get at: is the current p265 able to run the same sort of code that old p111/p114 did? Thanks! -igal