[#25257] [Bug #2030] Math.gamma(x) seg faults for integer x larger than 2<<63-1 — Hiro Asari <redmine@...>
Bug #2030: Math.gamma(x) seg faults for integer x larger than 2<<63-1
[#25272] [Feature #2032] Change the license to "GPLv2+ or Ruby's original". — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>
Feature #2032: Change the license to "GPLv2+ or Ruby's original".
Issue #2032 has been updated by Eric Hodel.
Issue #2032 has been updated by Shyouhei Urabe.
Issue #2032 has been updated by Kazuhiko Shiozaki.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Kazuhiko Shiozaki<redmine@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
If readline's change in license is the primary reason for reevaluating
Issue #2032 has been updated by Shyouhei Urabe.
Hi,
> To avoid enbugging a new bug, we must choose the another solutions.
2010/6/6 Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>:
(2010/06/06 20:27), Yusuke ENDOH wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 09:12, Yusuke ENDOH <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 14, 2010, at 22:48, Yusuke ENDOH wrote:
[#25275] Ruby platform interface — vondruch@...
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:17 AM, <vondruch@amberg.cz> wrote:
Excerpts from message of Wed Sep 02 13:03:22 +0300 2009:
[#25285] [Feature #2033] Move Core Development to Git — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Feature #2033: Move Core Development to Git
Issue #2033 has been updated by Yui NARUSE.
> Some commiter of Ruby live on Windows.
Jon wrote:
2009/9/4 Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>:
Michal Suchanek wrote:
2009/9/4 Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>:
The point I suspect that a lot of those pushing for the move to git
On Sep 4, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Eleanor McHugh wrote:
Issue #2033 has been updated by Yukihiro Matsumoto.
On Sep 2, 2009, at 11:19, Run Paint Run Run wrote:
>> * Opens Ruby development to a wider range of contributors. Ruby- and
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Eric Hodel<drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 19:50, Jeremy Kemper <jeremy@bitsweat.net> wrote:
Short summary:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Ron
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 16:43, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote=
Run Paint Run Run wrote:
Ruby is a basic infrastructure that needs to be stable. If it goes as agile as
[#25306] [Feature #2034] Consider the ICU Library for Improving and Expanding Unicode Support — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Feature #2034: Consider the ICU Library for Improving and Expanding Unicode Support
[#25360] [Bug #2043] incompatible character encodings — Vit Ondruch <redmine@...>
Bug #2043: incompatible character encodings
[#25367] [Bug #2048] Thread#raise: Handling of Current Exception — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #2048: Thread#raise: Handling of Current Exception
[#25394] Unmaintained code (Was: Move Core Development to Git) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
On Sep 4, 2009, at 02:16, Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Eric Hodel<drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
I'll volunteer to maintain delegate.rb.
I'll volunteer to maintain English.rb and tempfile.rb.
I would gladly maintain find, observer & ostruct if that can be of any
I think that one responsibility of maintainers of a component should be
[#25420] [Bug #2054] Onigurma Isn't Documented — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #2054: Onigurma Isn't Documented
[#25442] turning off indentation warnings — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
Is there a way in 1.9 to turn off only indentation warnings? I like
Hi,
Hi,
On Sep 22, 2009, at 8:19 PM, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
On Sep 24, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote:
>>>> I've looked into adding a global variable. I think it looks better,
[#25506] [Bug #2072] Segmentation faults with libxml-ruby and ruby 1.9.1 — 賢司 高橋 <redmine@...>
Bug #2072: Segmentation faults with libxml-ruby and ruby 1.9.1
On Sep 9, 2009, at 11:05 PM, =E8=B3=A2=E5=8F=B8 =E9=AB=98=E6=A9=8B =
[#25540] [Bug #2095] Oniguruma No Longer Understands Unihan Characters — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #2095: Oniguruma No Longer Understands Unihan Characters
[#25571] Implicit block argument in Procs — Cody Brocious <cody.brocious@...>
I ran into some block behavior I thought was a bit odd. Calling a
[#25587] Minimalist Ruby Install for Windows — Mike Hatfield <oakraven13@...>
Hi everyone,
[#25630] [Bug #2114] Array Hash inconsistency — Wim Yedema <redmine@...>
Bug #2114: Array Hash inconsistency
[#25632] [Bug #2117] Binding to a class, a method from the class's superclass's metaclass, fails — "Shane O'Brien" <redmine@...>
Bug #2117: Binding to a class, a method from the class's superclass's metaclass, fails
[#25634] Kernel.eval("local_variables",binding) bug in Ruby 1.9 — Howard Yeh <hayeah@...>
Hi,
[#25635] [Bug #2119] 'gem' method has problem when gems are in ~/.gem and no version requirement is given — Cezary Baginski <redmine@...>
Bug #2119: 'gem' method has problem when gems are in ~/.gem and no version requirement is given
Issue #2119 has been updated by Cezary Baginski.
[#25644] [Bug #2121] mathn/rational destroys Fixnum#/, Fixnum#quo and Bignum#/, Bignum#quo — Charles Nutter <redmine@...>
Bug #2121: mathn/rational destroys Fixnum#/, Fixnum#quo and Bignum#/, Bignum#quo
Charles Nutter wrote:
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Joel VanderWerf
Hi,
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:29 AM, brian ford <brixen@gmail.com> wrote:
[#25679] Ruby 1.9 pack('m') and unpack('m') not round tripping — Mikel Lindsaar <raasdnil@...>
Hello all,
[#25681] [Bug #2127] Fiber#resume - segfault inside C extension — Suraj Kurapati <redmine@...>
Bug #2127: Fiber#resume - segfault inside C extension
[#25709] [Bug #2131] f(not x) => syntax error — "James M. Lawrence" <redmine@...>
Bug #2131: f(not x) => syntax error
Issue #2131 has been updated by James M. Lawrence.
[#25756] syck maintenance? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Has anyone taken this over?
Ryan Davis wrote:
There are about 15 open issues relating to yaml/syck.
[#25764] [Proposal] Maintainer confirmation and discharging process — Yugui <yugui@...>
2009/9/25 Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@marc-andre.ca>:
Hi,
[#25769] A challenge: Enumerator#next in JRuby — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
I have a challenge for anyone who wants to discuss, propose
For what it's worth, although solution 3 is not very pretty, it could
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
In article <f04d2210909251312q46bd51c0teacc4b0a8c417f0c@mail.gmail.com>,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
In article <f04d2210909252208k4fd66540u54a5d280613bb043@mail.gmail.com>,
On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
[#25796] [Bug #2144] Split functionality of Float#inspect and Float#to_s — Roger Pack <redmine@...>
Bug #2144: Split functionality of Float#inspect and Float#to_s
[#25820] [Feature #2152] Split functionality of Float#inspect and Float#to_s — Roger Pack <redmine@...>
Feature #2152: Split functionality of Float#inspect and Float#to_s
Issue #2152 has been updated by Roger Pack.
Hi,
Hi,
Issue #2152 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune.
> Issue #2152 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune.
Hi,
Hi,
[#25831] event hook in 1.9? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
> /**
Ryan Davis wrote:
[#25841] [ANN] Ruby Developer's Meeting 20091013 — Yugui <yugui@...>
Hi,
[#25853] [Bug #2160] JSON can't parse input where top-level object is a string — caleb clausen <redmine@...>
Bug #2160: JSON can't parse input where top-level object is a string
Issue #2160 has been updated by Tim Bray.
Tim Bray wrote:
[#25865] struggling to convince myself 1.9's constant lookup rules make any sense — "ara.t.howard" <ara.t.howard@...>
[#25876] Fate of Win32API.rb? — Jon <jon.forums@...>
Spelunking the ruby-core Nabble archives and Redmine hasn't yet shed any
Hello,
[ruby-core:25769] A challenge: Enumerator#next in JRuby
I have a challenge for anyone who wants to discuss, propose
suggestions, or help us fix this problem.
Ruby 1.8.7 added the ability to "next" your way through an Enumerator.
At a glance, this seems fine; it's just external enumeration. The
problem, however, is that enumeration can be arbitrarily complex.
Take this code for example:
class Foo
def each
5.times {|i| yield i}
end
end
enum = Foo.new.to_enum
puts enum.next # => 0
puts enum.next # => 1
What's actually happening here?
to_enum creates a new Enumerator to wrap our Foo type. All it requires
is that an "each" be implemented. The Enumerator then uses each to
perform iterations for collect, select, etc. In those cases, you're
really just deferring the call to #collect until a later time, and
enumeration proceeds as normal with #collect running until #each has
completed. But the "next" case is different.
With "next", we have a more complicated situation: enumeration
*pauses* after each element. Here's how things work when using
Enumerator#next
1. On the first call to #next, a fiber or generator is spun up to
start the call to each, similar to this:
f = Fiber.new { collection.each {|i| Fiber.yield i} }
2. For each element next returns, the fiber/generator is invoked to
produce the next result
def next
f.resume
end
3. When the enumeration completes (or at any time) you can rewind and
start from the beginning.
In Ruby 1.8.7 and Ruby 1.9, this is implemented using continuations
(delimited continuations, i.e. Fibers or coroutines), making it
dreadfully slow to "next" your way through a collection. On JRuby,
because there's an in-progress #each we have to pause for every
element, Enumerator#next has to spin up a *new native thread*. Each
#next call then pings the thread to produce a new result.
Functionally, this works just fine, other than the cost of us spinning
up a thread. But there's a larger problem: an Enumerator-created
thread has a full lifecycle apart from the caller's thread. As a
result the enumerator thread can root objects (preventing them from
being GCed), including the Enumerator itself.
So the small problem with Enumerator#next is that it's slow on MRI
because of continuations and slow on JRuby because of native threads.
But on JRuby, we have the additional large problem of managing the
associated thread and making sure it doesn't live forever if you don't
complete an enumeration.
Bottom line is that Enumerator#next is a real problem for JRuby. I
hope it's not going to be impossible to support, but at this point the
path forward is unclear.
Here's the options as I see them:
1. Soldier on, attempting to find a way to use native thread for
Enumerator#next without rooting objects, etc
2. Support Enumerator#next only on core types where we know how to do
enumeration without #each
3. Provide a way to cancel an enumeration, so implementations like
JRuby will know when to forcibly end the fiber/thread
4. Require that along with "each", arbitrary collection types must
implement "to_enum" to avoid requiring fibers/continuations in all
Ruby impls
5. Not support Enumerator#next in JRuby at all
Obviously we want to avoid #5, and ideally #3 as well. We don't want
to stand in the way of 1.8.7 (and 1.9.2) adoption, but without a
satisfactory solution to this problem JRuby may have a crippled
Enumerator#next implementation, making it less reliable across
implementations.
- Charlie