[#19731] use of require thread safety — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...>

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but...should there be

56 messages 2008/11/08
[#19796] Re: use of require thread safety — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/11/11

Hi,

[#21651] Re: use of require thread safety — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2009/01/29

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#19798] Re: use of require thread safety — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/11/11

> While a thread is requiring a given file, another thread which

[#20732] Re: use of require thread safety — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/20

> Currently with 1.8.7 (for me) the secondmost thread continues

[#20737] Re: use of require thread safety — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/12/20

Roger Pack wrote:

[#20769] Re: use of require thread safety — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/12/21

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#20795] Re: use of require thread safety — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/12/22

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 03:05:07AM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#19821] Re: use of require thread safety — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/11/11

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:51:45AM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#19829] Re: use of require thread safety — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/11/11

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#19759] Proposal: Method#get_args — "Yehuda Katz" <wycats@...>

I'd like to propose a way to introspect into the arguments of a method

97 messages 2008/11/09
[#19787] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/11/11

The only question I have is why would one want to know the names of

[#19789] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Trans <transfire@...> 2008/11/11

On Nov 10, 7:18=A0pm, "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2...@gmail.com> wrote:

[#19818] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Mikael Hlund <mikael@...> 2008/11/11

Allow me to throw in my ~.116892074 DKK;

[#19837] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/11/11

Mikael H淡ilund wrote:

[#19838] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/11/11

[#19870] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2008/11/12

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 04:48:03AM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:

[#19874] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/11/12

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 06:01:40PM +0900, Brian Candler wrote:

[#19881] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/11/12

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#19887] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2008/11/12

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 02:06:15AM +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#19889] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/11/12

Paul Brannan wrote:

[#19892] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...> 2008/11/12

[#19893] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Jim Deville <jdeville@...> 2008/11/12

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

[#19894] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2008/11/12

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 04:33:07AM +0900, Jim Deville wrote:

[#19895] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...> 2008/11/12

[#19896] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2008/11/12

Jim Weirich wrote:

[#19899] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Jim Weirich <jim.weirich@...> 2008/11/12

On Nov 12, 2008, at 4:12 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

[#19915] Re: Proposal: Method#get_args — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2008/11/13

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 07:02:25AM +0900, Jim Weirich wrote:

[#19927] Re: {Proc,Method}#parameters (Re: Proposal: Method#get_args) — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/11/14

Hi,

[#19784] Status of copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — Hongli Lai <hongli@...99.net>

Hi.

22 messages 2008/11/10
[#19799] Re: Status of copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — "Narihiro Nakamura" <authornari@...> 2008/11/11

Hi.

[#19812] Re: Status of copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — "Yehuda Katz" <wycats@...> 2008/11/11

Narihiro,

[#19823] Re: Status of copy-on-write friendly garbage collector — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/11/11

Hi,

[#19845] [Bug #743] Socket.gethostbyname returns odd values — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #743: Socket.gethostbyname returns odd values

11 messages 2008/11/11

[#19846] [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #744: memory leak in callcc?

142 messages 2008/11/11
[#21394] [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Roger Pack <redmine@...> 2009/01/17

Issue #744 has been updated by Roger Pack.

[#21429] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2009/01/19

[#21441] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2009/01/19

Hi,

[#21483] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2009/01/21

[#21487] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Michal Babej <calcifer@...> 2009/01/21

On Wednesday 21 of January 2009 10:21:19 Brent Roman wrote:

[#21711] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2009/02/01

[#22062] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...> 2009/02/14

>> I've tried that myself but it didn't work very well

[#22265] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Michal Babej <calcifer@...> 2009/02/19

On Saturday 14 of February 2009 08:17:22 Roger Pack wrote:

[#21514] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2009/01/22

[#19945] [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Roger Pack <redmine@...> 2008/11/15

Issue #744 has been updated by Roger Pack.

[#19968] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/11/17

[#19969] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2008/11/17

At 12:54 08/11/17, Brent Roman wrote:

[#19970] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/11/17

[#19972] Re: [Bug #744] memory leak in callcc? — Kurt Stephens <kurt@...> 2008/11/17

A common technique is to allocate a reasonably sized array (256-bytes)

[#20149] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/11/28

[#20517] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/13

> I implemented a scheme for recording the maximum depth of the C stack in

[#20534] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/13

[#20750] [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/21

[#20751] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Ezra Zygmuntowicz <ezmobius@...> 2008/12/21

[#20752] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/21

[#20781] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/22

First thanks for doing all that hard work. I'm sure it's not pleasant

[#20783] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/22

[#20903] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/26

Seems to overall be a tidge slower for "micro" stuff--5 or 10%.

[#20914] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/27

[#20922] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/27

> You ran this benchmark suite, correct?

[#20931] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/12/28

[#20995] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Roger Pack" <rogerpack2005@...> 2008/12/30

Hmm interesting.

[#21261] Re: [PATCH] Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — "Stephen Sykes" <sdsykes@...> 2009/01/11

Brent,

[#20168] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2008/11/30

Hi,

[#20175] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2008/11/30

The problem can be demonstrated with a very simple program (attached), and

[#20178] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2008/11/30

[#20185] Re: Promising C coding techniques to reduce MRI's memory use — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2008/12/01

> What I did come up with was not ugly at all. Factor the unwieldy switch

[#19938] Fibers in 1.8 — "Aman Gupta" <rubytalk@...1.net>

Are there any plans to backport Fiber to ruby 1.8?

13 messages 2008/11/15

[#20008] [Bug #766] 'Not enough space' error on windows — Ittay Dror <redmine@...>

Bug #766: 'Not enough space' error on windows

17 messages 2008/11/20

[#20092] [Bug #797] bug or feature: local method ? — Francois Proulx <redmine@...>

Bug #797: bug or feature: local method ?

23 messages 2008/11/25
[#20097] Re: [Bug #797] bug or feature: local method ? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/11/25

Hi,

[#20098] Re: [Bug #797] bug or feature: local method ? — Dave Thomas <dave@...> 2008/11/25

[#20100] Re: [Bug #797] bug or feature: local method ? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2008/11/25

Hi,

[#20127] Re: [Bug #797] bug or feature: local method ? — Francoys <francois.pr@...> 2008/11/26

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[ruby-core:20052] Re: 1.9 method argument binding question

From: "=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rados=B3aw_Bu=B3at?=" <radek.bulat@...>
Date: 2008-11-23 11:09:31 UTC
List: ruby-core #20052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In This Thread