[#27003] [Bug #2422] splat operator fails on array of 1 element — Raul Parolari <redmine@...>

Bug #2422: splat operator fails on array of 1 element

12 messages 2009/12/02

[#27025] [Backport #2431] StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n" — Hiroshi NAKAMURA <redmine@...>

Backport #2431: StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n"

8 messages 2009/12/04

[#27086] [Feature #2454] OpenSSL has no maintainer — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>

Feature #2454: OpenSSL has no maintainer

16 messages 2009/12/07

[#27120] #to_enum ignores block? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Is #to_enum ignoring its block expected?

11 messages 2009/12/09

[#27135] better GC? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Could I put in a small plea for a better GC?

56 messages 2009/12/10
[#27136] Re: better GC? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2009/12/11

Hi,

[#27476] Re: better GC? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2010/01/07

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 09:07:16AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#27477] Re: better GC? — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...> 2010/01/07

Excerpts from Paul Brannan's message of Thu Jan 07 21:53:34 +0200 2010:

[#27563] Re: better GC? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2010/01/12

[#27199] [Backport #2488] thread usage can result in bad HANDLE — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Backport #2488: thread usage can result in bad HANDLE

12 messages 2009/12/16

[#27286] [Bug #2515] Array#select! — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #2515: Array#select!

17 messages 2009/12/22

[#27327] [Bug #2531] Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>

Bug #2531: Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version

9 messages 2009/12/25

[#27360] [Feature #2542] URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886 — Marc-Andre Lafortune <redmine@...>

Feature #2542: URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886

15 messages 2009/12/31

[ruby-core:27133] Re: #to_enum ignores block?

From: Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...>
Date: 2009-12-10 16:55:35 UTC
List: ruby-core #27133
Hi,

2009/12/11 Roger Pack <rogerdpack@gmail.com>:
>> ...
>> or if you REALLY wanted those results:
>>
>> ruby-1.9.1-p376 > (1..3).map {|n| n**2}
>>  => [1, 4, 9]
>
> Oops well assuming the operation is correct--it's because I want an
> enumerator, not an array.

I really understand what you want to do.  But unfortunately, current
Ruby does not support the feature directly.


So I made a simple library:

http://mamememo.blogspot.com/2009/11/enumerablerrb-enumerable-lazy-version.html
http://d.hatena.ne.jp/ku-ma-me/20091111/p2 (in Japanese)

Matz said that these methods are acceptable to be embedded into the
core, but did not accept their names (selector, mapper, etc.).
Instead, Matz suggested enum_select, enum_map, etc., but I dislike
them because they are too verbose.

Now I'm thinking that it is good for all Enumerable's methods
(including map and select) to return an Enumerator instead of an Array.
Yes, this is a big change of the spec.  The change should wait until
2.0 even if it is accepted,


>> As far as I can tell, standard Ruby Enumerable#to_enum never took a block
>
> Older builds of 1.9.0 did, or so I am told [1].
>
> Currently one can roll one's own "filter" block if desired, I was just
> wondering if it was a "slip up" to remove the functionality or not.  I
> assume it wasn't, but just wanted to double check.

According to the commit log, it seemed to be "an undocumented feature",
and was removed intentionally.

http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=16146

-- 
Yusuke ENDOH <mame@tsg.ne.jp>

In This Thread