[#18436] [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...>

Hi all,

81 messages 2008/09/02
[#18667] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Yusuke ENDOH" <mame@...> 2008/09/17

Hi,

[#18847] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...> 2008/09/24

Hi, Yusuke

[#18848] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Yusuke ENDOH" <mame@...> 2008/09/24

Hi,

[#18886] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/09/25

[#18889] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2008/09/25

Ryan Davis wrote:

[#18906] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/09/25

[#18908] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2008/09/25

Dave Thomas wrote:

[#19032] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/09/30

[#19036] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...> 2008/09/30

[#19039] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/09/30

[#19042] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/09/30

[#19195] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2008/10/08

[#19202] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2008/10/08

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote=

[#19203] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/10/08

On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 09:28:22PM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#18452] [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...>

Would it be possible to have a few patches applied before freeze [if

27 messages 2008/09/04
[#18471] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/06

Hi,

[#18490] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/09/08

Hi,

[#18486] Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...>

Firstly, I apologise if I am going over old ground here - I haven't been

39 messages 2008/09/08
[#18492] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/08

Hi,

[#18494] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/08

On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 19:45:36 +1000, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#18499] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2008/09/08

Hi,

[#18500] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@...> 2008/09/08

On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:43 AM, NARUSE, Yui wrote:

[#18515] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2008/09/09

# First off, I'm neutral to this issue

[#18530] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@...> 2008/09/10

On Sep 8, 2008, at 9:06 PM, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:

[#18533] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2008/09/10

In article <3119E5AB-AEC8-4FEE-B2FA-8C75482E0E9D@sun.com>,

[#18504] Re: Ruby 1.9 strings & character encoding — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/09

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 03:43:54 +1000, NARUSE, Yui <naruse@airemix.jp> wrote:

[#18572] Working on CSV's Encoding Support — James Gray <james@...>

I'm trying to get the standard CSV library ready for m17n in Ruby

23 messages 2008/09/13
[#18575] Re: Working on CSV's Encoding Support — James Gray <james@...> 2008/09/14

On Sep 13, 2008, at 5:39 PM, James Gray wrote:

[#18576] Re: Working on CSV's Encoding Support — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/14

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:48:47 +1000, James Gray <james@grayproductions.net>

[#18640] Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...>

Hi,

89 messages 2008/09/17
[#18643] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — James Gray <james@...> 2008/09/17

On Sep 16, 2008, at 8:20 PM, Michael Selig wrote:

[#18647] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/17

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:51:14 +1000, James Gray <james@grayproductions.net>

[#18658] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — James Gray <james@...> 2008/09/17

On Sep 16, 2008, at 11:21 PM, Michael Selig wrote:

[#18660] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2008/09/17

Hi,

[#18663] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Matthias Wächter <matthias@...> 2008/09/17

On 9/17/2008 3:39 PM, NARUSE, Yui wrote:

[#18666] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/17

Hi,

[#18728] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/09/19

At 00:01 08/09/18, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#18729] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/19

Hi,

[#18732] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/19

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 18:24:41 +1000, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#18734] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/19

Oops, I misfired my mail reader; the following is the right one:

[#18751] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/20

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:52:30 +1000, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#18761] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/20

Hi,

[#18774] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — "Michael Selig" <michael.selig@...> 2008/09/21

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 02:05:30 +1000, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#18776] Re: Character encodings - a less radical suggestion — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/09/22

Hello Michael,

[#18664] Re: Character encodings - a radical suggestion — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/09/17

Hi,

[#18762] [Feature #578] add method to disassemble Proc objects — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Feature #578: add method to disassemble Proc objects

17 messages 2008/09/20

[#18872] [RIP] Guy Decoux. — "Jean-Fran輟is Tr穗" <jftran@...>

Hello,

14 messages 2008/09/24

[#18899] refute_{equal, match, nil, same} is not useful — Fujioka <fuj@...>

Hi,

27 messages 2008/09/25

[#18937] A stupid question... — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Just what was wrong with Test::Unit? Sure, it was slightly bloated.

25 messages 2008/09/25
[#18941] Re: A stupid question... — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2008/09/25

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

[#19004] Let Ruby be Ruby — Trans <transfire@...> 2008/09/28

[#18986] miniunit problems and release of Ruby 1.9.0-5 — "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@...>

Hi,

14 messages 2008/09/27

[#19043] Ruby is "stealing" names from operating system API:s — "Johan Holmberg" <johan556@...>

Hi!

13 messages 2008/09/30

[ruby-core:18849] Re: [ANN] Ruby 1.9.1 feature freeze

From: "Bill Kelly" <billk@...>
Date: 2008-09-24 10:18:34 UTC
List: ruby-core #18849
From: "Yugui (Yuki Sonoda)" <yugui@yugui.jp>
>
> Yusuke ENDOH wrote:
>> I'd like to confirm one thing; will the stardard libraries be also frozen?
> 
> The standard libraries will also be frozen.
> If you have changes of some libraries or features, let me know it by
> replying to this message by tomorrow and commit it as soon as possible.


Before it's too late, I wanted to plead for the possibility
of restoring the enumerator behavior David Black describes
below:


From: "David A. Black" <dblack@rubypal.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: Advanced conditionals
> 
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008, Bill Kelly wrote:
>>
>> From: "David A. Black" <dblack@rubypal.com>
>>> 
>>> [...] but you cannot, any longer, do this:
>>> 
>>> irb(main):007:0> a = [1,2,3,4]
>>> => [1, 2, 3, 4]
>>> irb(main):008:0> e = a.enum_for(:map, &lambda {|x| x * 10 })
>>> => #<Enumerable::Enumerator:0x3d7444>
>>> irb(main):009:0> e.next
>>> => 10
>>> 
>>> You'll get 1 now, rather than 10. I'm still very puzzled by the
>>> removal of this capability.
>>
>> Maybe worth asking on ruby-core?  Still 13 days till the
>> feature freeze...!
> 
> I did. Shugo did discuss it some, but I'm afraid I still didn't
> understand, or maybe I just wasn't convinced. I think it probably
> boils down to efficiency, though it seems to me to be an example of
> something so powerful and potentially useful that efficiency wouldn't
> (up to a point) be a deal-breaker.


It seems to me like one of those great features where ruby
pleasently surprises you by doing what you expected.

Matz, et al: Is there no possibility to retain this behavior?


Thanks for your consideration,

Bill



In This Thread