[#18042] Re: New array methods cycle, choice, shuffle (plus bug in cycle) — gdefty@...
Hi,
[#18052] Enumerators that know about a block — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
[#18086] Suggestion to change Time#to_s format to an official standard — Dirkjan Bussink <d.bussink@...>
Hello people,
[#18110] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #403] (Open) Add support to Haiku — Anonymous <redmine@...>
Issue #403 has been reported by Anonymous.
[#18121] [Ruby 1.8.7 - Bug #405] (Open) ssl.rb:31: [BUG] Bus Error — Anonymous <redmine@...>
Issue #405 has been reported by Anonymous.
[#18130] Re: New array methods cycle, choice, shuffle (plus bug in cycle) — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>
> Seriously though... Array.first is a noun.
[#18145] [PATCH] error.c (Init_Exception): Rename class "fatal" to "Fatal" — Otto Hilska <otto.hilska@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 15:48, Jeremy Kemper <jeremy@bitsweat.net> wrote:
[#18164] Re: New array methods cycle, choice, shuffle (plus bug in cycle) — gdefty@...
In message "Re: [ruby-core:18133] Re: New array
[#18237] Severe problem with garbage collection — Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Hi,
[#18247] Thread#priority(=) will be obsolete — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
[#18252] Re: result for mget [last:10 MIME/multipart] (1/1) (ruby-core ML) — "Giuseppe Bilotta" <giuseppe.bilotta@...>
>> We are planning to make Thread#priority(=) method as obsolete method
Hi,
[#18257] Definition of "Support levels", 1.9.1 supported platforms and recruitment for platform maintainers — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...>
Hi, all.
HI! This answers the question that I asked a few days ago, thank you!
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#18263] Am I right that this is wrong? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
Hi,
Hi --
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:04 PM, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:
[#18303] Ruby 1.8.6 yields 50%-100% performance gain when compiled at full optimization — kevin nolan <kpnolan@...>
After compiling Ruby 1.8.6 with '-O3 -mtune=K8 -march=K8' on an AMD 4800
kevin nolan:
On Sat, 2008-08-16 at 03:39 +0900, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:
[#18314] [Bug #449] File.zero? returns true when given a directory on Windows — Anonymous <redmine@...>
Bug #449: File.zero? returns true when given a directory on Windows
Hi,
I submitted that original bug (first time using redmine :)). Here's some mo=
Hi,
Not at all - it means we're now free to do the right thing :)
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:45 PM, John Lam (IRONRUBY)
[#18319] NEW Command: absolute_path() -- — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
Core,
Hi,
Are you sure you didn't mean to use "~/oracle/bin"
Trans wrote:
[#18349] [Feature:1.9] autoload with a block — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
Hi,
[#18354] Retrieving bytecode for method — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Hi,
[#18381] [Bug #496] DRb.start_service(nil) is very slow — Hongli Lai <redmine@...>
Bug #496: DRb.start_service(nil) is very slow
[#18387] [Bug:1.9] rubygems fails to cache spec file — "Yusuke ENDOH" <mame@...>
Hi,
[#18396] problems with test_io.rb on cygwin — Martin Duerst <duerst@...>
I have run into problems with test_io.rb on cygwin.
Hello,
[#18405] [Bug #512] String#% behavior — Federico Builes <redmine@...>
Bug #512: String#% behavior
[#18409] ruby-lang.org has old download links — Nate_Wiger@...
The download links here:
[#18414] DoS vulnerability in REXML — "Shugo Maeda" <shugo@...>
Hi,
[#18424] [Bug #528] Several ruby-mode.el improvements — Nathan Weizenbaum <redmine@...>
Bug #528: Several ruby-mode.el improvements
[ruby-core:18150] Re: Enumerators that know about a block
Hi --
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008, Shugo Maeda wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2008/8/6 David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com>:
>> I'd rather have an enumerator that already knows both the method it
>> represents and the block it's supposed to use. I guess I got used to
>> it when we had:
>>
>> e = array.enum_for(:map, &block)
>>
>> and I never understood why that was removed. I think it's someone
>> else's "least surprise" :-)
>
> First of all,
>
> e = array.enum_for(:map)
> p e.each(&block)
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> p e.map(&block)
>
> Then,
>
> e = array.enum_for(:map, &block1)
> p e.each(&block2)
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> p e.map(&block2)
> # block1 is ignored for the same reason that Kernel#print ignores blocks.
>
> I would be surpised if it's equivalent to:
>
> p e.map(&block1).each(&block2)
>
> or
>
> p e.map(&block1).map(&block2)
>
> But you want this behaviour, don't you?
I guess I was surprised when this stopped working:
array = [1,2,3,4,5]
e = array.enum_for(:map, &lambda {|x| x * 10 })
e.select {|x| x > 30 } # [40, 50]
I don't have any strong reason for it except that it seems to me to
make enumerators much more powerful. (But maybe at a cost.)
> Speaking about implementation, Enumerable#map is impletented as follows:
>
> module Enumerable
> # actually implemented in C
> def map
> result = []
> each do |i|
> result << yield(i)
> end
> return result
> end
> end
>
> How do you convert it into Enumerator as you think automatically? I can't
> think of any implementation other than the following example:
>
> module Enumerable
> def my_enum_for(method, &block)
> return send(method, &block).enum_for(:each)
> end
> end
>
> But it's not efficient, and I think it's necessary for an efficent
> implementation
> to modify Enumerable#map itself.
I'm not sure how it was implemented originally. If it's just going to
create the intermediate object and then an enum_for on that object, it
doesn't make sense for performance.
David
--
Rails training from David A. Black and Ruby Power and Light:
* Advancing With Rails August 18-21 Edison, NJ
* Co-taught by D.A. Black and Erik Kastner
See http://www.rubypal.com for details and updates!