[#24648] [Bug #1852] Enumerable's #hash Raises ArgumentError When Recursive Values are Present — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #1852: Enumerable's #hash Raises ArgumentError When Recursive Values are Present
In article <4a73e51b5a4f9_138119f2a982704e@redmine.ruby-lang.org>,
> Is it valuable to implement such function?
In article <67e307490908010125r6fa76654pa8e2224f714588fc@mail.gmail.com>,
> * several real applications are found
In article <67e307490908012245x3bf3be81oc7f060c2569ad4ab@mail.gmail.com>,
>>> * several real applications are found
[#24650] [Bug #1853] Cannot make constants using upper-case extended characters? — Brian Candler <redmine@...>
Bug #1853: Cannot make constants using upper-case extended characters?
[#24666] request: include more headers/source in installations? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>
Background:
[#24673] [Feature #1857] install *.h and *.inc — Roger Pack <redmine@...>
Feature #1857: install *.h and *.inc
Issue #1857 has been updated by Mark Moseley.
Issue #1857 has been updated by Jason Roelofs.
Hi,
Issue #1857 has been updated by Mark Moseley.
[#24675] Include Order — James Gray <james@...>
I was surprised to find that:
[#24747] [Bug #1881] [PATCH] Build Documentation for Kernel#gem and Gem — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #1881: [PATCH] Build Documentation for Kernel#gem and Gem
[#24775] [Feature #1889] Teach Onigurma Unicode 5.0 Character Properties — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Feature #1889: Teach Onigurma Unicode 5.0 Character Properties
Issue #1889 has been updated by Yui NARUSE.
Hi,
> |First, we should decide supporting Unicode version.
[#24786] [Bug #1893] Recursive Enumerable#join is surprising — Jeremy Kemper <redmine@...>
Bug #1893: Recursive Enumerable#join is surprising
Issue #1893 has been updated by Yusuke Endoh.
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
[#24791] [Bug #1898] Method#== for Methods with the Same Body — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #1898: Method#== for Methods with the Same Body
[#24793] [Feature #1900] Suggestion: Encoding#ascii_compatible? — Brian Candler <redmine@...>
Feature #1900: Suggestion: Encoding#ascii_compatible?
[#24824] 1.9 gem env is far slower than on 1.8? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>
Currently when I run "gem env" on a windows machine
[#24854] embedding ruby 1.9 frustration — Rolando Abarca <funkaster@...>
Hello,
> I'm getting really frustrated, because there's almost no documentation
> Perhaps try using only rb_thread_blocking_region()?
[#24862] [Bug #1925] Division of negative numbers — Roswitha Rissner <redmine@...>
Bug #1925: Division of negative numbers
[#24885] IDEA: Shortcut syntax for binary strings? — Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown@...>
Hey folks,
On Aug 12, 2009, at 2:55 PM, Gary Wright wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:53 PM, James Gray<james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
[#24921] regparse.c - patch to fix memory leak — Ralf Junker <ralfjunker@...>
There are several memory leaks in regparse.c. They all relate to incomplete pattern branches, where a branch node is not freed when branch parsing is aborted. I discovered this by successively shortening all patterns in my test suite (which is not in Ruby, nor in C, unfortunately) down to zero length.
[#24923] [Bug #1939] Ripper doesn't handle local variables — Magnus Holm <redmine@...>
Bug #1939: Ripper doesn't handle local variables
[#24927] [Bug #1940] Segmentation fault on TestFiber#test_many_fibers_with_threads (make check) — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>
Bug #1940: Segmentation fault on TestFiber#test_many_fibers_with_threads (make check)
[#24982] [Feature #1961] Kernel#__dir__ — Yutaka HARA <redmine@...>
Feature #1961: Kernel#__dir__
Wouldn't it be a little confusing to remember that __FILE__ is uppercase and
Hi,
Issue #1961 has been updated by Roger Pack.
On 23.03.10 19:10, Roger Pack wrote:
Perhaps __FILE__ should not be a raw String object, but rather a CurrentFile object. It could have a #to_str to return the normal String so it can be used like normal, but can provide methods like #dir, where __FILE__.dir == File.dirname(__FILE__).
This is nice but would not be backward compatible with code that
On 3/24/10, Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@headius.com> wrote:
Actually, I proposed that it be a String subclass, so it actually
[#24989] [Bug #1964] Compile Issue on Solaris 10 — Brian Toal <redmine@...>
Bug #1964: Compile Issue on Solaris 10
[#25010] [Bug #1972] Changing ENV['TZ'] of a running process should change behavior of Time — Shri Borde <redmine@...>
Bug #1972: Changing ENV['TZ'] of a running process should change behavior of Time
[#25025] [Backport #1975] Backport Dir.mktmpdir — Kirk Haines <redmine@...>
Backport #1975: Backport Dir.mktmpdir
In article <4a8e914c6160_2100affe60043c6@redmine.ruby-lang.org>,
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Tanaka Akira<akr@fsij.org> wrote:
In article <f4cd26df0908240817s68a6835ie65d942bbd3b95be@mail.gmail.com>,
[#25027] [Bug #1978] fixed crash in lib/logger.rb from dependency on svn keywork expansion — Stephen Bannasch <redmine@...>
Bug #1978: fixed crash in lib/logger.rb from dependency on svn keywork expansion
[#25032] [Bug #1979] parser confused by local variable assignment — caleb clausen <redmine@...>
Bug #1979: parser confused by local variable assignment
[#25039] [Bug #1982] Kernel.load(..., true) --> scope problem — Johan Holmberg <redmine@...>
Bug #1982: Kernel.load(..., true) --> scope problem
[#25041] Proposal: Simpler block format — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
I'd like to propose that we add the following syntax for procs in Ruby:
On Aug 22, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
Yehuda Katz wrote:
On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Caleb Clausen <caleb@inforadical.net>wrote:
Yehuda Katz wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Caleb Clausen <caleb@inforadical.net>wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>wrote:
On Aug 23, 2009, at 15:58, Yehuda Katz wrote:
Hi --
Hi,
Hi,
Hi everyone,
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 4:53 PM, David A. Black <dblack@rubypal.com> wrote:
[#25086] [Bug #1991] ruby should use twolevel namespace on OS X — Michal Suchanek <redmine@...>
Bug #1991: ruby should use twolevel namespace on OS X
Issue #1991 has been updated by Shyouhei Urabe.
Hi,
[#25131] [Feature #1999] Improved Tempfile — Hongli Lai <redmine@...>
Feature #1999: Improved Tempfile
[#25139] Patch writer's guide to submit — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hi,
Reducing the submitters' frustration by reducing the delay for
[#25143] Is this an intentional change in 1.9? — Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...>
This came up on the ruby lang forum.
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto<matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#25151] [Bug #2003] respond_to? not working 1.9.1p243 OSX — Adam Salter <redmine@...>
Bug #2003: respond_to? not working 1.9.1p243 OSX
[#25181] RegOOps: An Object-Oriented Approach to Pattern Matching — Run Paint Run Run <runrun@...>
Regexps in Ruby can feel like a jagged edge to the otherwise smooth
[#25191] [Feature #2012] Set event_flags on thread creation if hook exists — Mark Moseley <redmine@...>
Feature #2012: Set event_flags on thread creation if hook exists
[#25200] [Bug #2018] [irb] BasicObject.new doesn't have an inspect — Daniel Bovensiepen <redmine@...>
Bug #2018: [irb] BasicObject.new doesn't have an inspect
[#25208] Module#prepend and Array#prepend — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
Matz,
Yehuda Katz wrote:
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Joel VanderWerf
Hi,
[#25210] [Feature #2022] Patch for ruby-1.8.6 and openssl-1.0 — Jeroen van Meeuwen <redmine@...>
Feature #2022: Patch for ruby-1.8.6 and openssl-1.0
[#25217] [Bug #2025] problem with pthread handling on non NPTL platform — Petr Salinger <redmine@...>
Bug #2025: problem with pthread handling on non NPTL platform
[#25220] [Bug #2026] String encodings are not supported by most of IO on Linux — Vit Ondruch <redmine@...>
Bug #2026: String encodings are not supported by most of IO on Linux
Issue #2026 has been updated by Yui NARUSE.
2009/9/1 Yui NARUSE <redmine@ruby-lang.org>:
[ruby-core:25098] Re: [Backport #1975] Backport Dir.mktmpdir
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Tanaka Akira<akr@fsij.org> wrote: > In article <f4cd26df0908240817s68a6835ie65d942bbd3b95be@mail.gmail.com>, > irk Haines <wyhaines@gmail.com> writes: > >> (*nod*) t has been backported through the rest of the 1.8 line, >> though, and only adds capability; it doesn't change any existing >> functionality, so I don't see a problem with just backporting it to >> 1.8.6. f I am incorrect in that analysis, please let me know. > > It seems your maintainance policy is different from Urabe's. > Urabe's policy is "bugfix only". o new feature. > > Although policy difference doesn't mean bad in general, I > guess the difference makes the distinction between 1.8.6 and > 1.8.7 bit unclear. That distinction is somewhat blurry, though. Some of the bugfixes have introduced implicit behavioral changes, and IMHO, that is OK so long as the behavioral change is required to fix the bug, or is more correct (as in some of the recent fixes with handling of Bignums, infinity, etc....). In general, I'm not adopting new features from 1.8.7, but where there is something that won't break existing code that depends on 1.8.6, and where there's an arguable benefit to backporting something that has already percholated through 1.8 HEAD and 1.8.7, I don't see harm in allowing that capability to fall through to 1.8.6. There are a lot of changes that can't easily move from 1.8.7 to 1.8.6 because of larger, fundamental changes to the code. In the case of Dir.mktmpdir, which is just a pure ruby addition to a class, and doesn't have a larger API that goes with it, I don't see a problem, especially since it, in turn, simplifies the test case code in at least two instances. Contrast this with String#start_with?. That is also being used by the test_file_exhaustive.rb test set, but I won't consider backporting it because it is a far larger change that lives in the context of a number of other String class changes which are unlikely to be truly backwards compatible with existing 1.8.6 behavior. 1.8.6 should not mirror 1.8.7, because, IMHO, the progression in the 1.8 and 1.9 lines should encourage people to eventually move to those versions because of the advancements to be found there, but there are still a large number of people entrenched in 1.8.6, so modest refinements which can be backported without risk of breaking someone's code, and which offer some other tangible advantage, should be considered. I am completely open to discussion regarding my perspective, though. If anyone thinks I should have a different policy, please speak up and tell me why. Thanks, Kirk Haines