[#30545] [Ann] Contribution wanted: identify tickets for 1.9.2 release — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...>
Hi all --
[#30558] [Feature #3380] Minitest Runner Command — Thomas Sawyer <redmine@...>
Feature #3380: Minitest Runner Command
[#30592] [Bug #3392] Kernel.open Ignores :binmode Key in Opts Hash w.r.t Encoding — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #3392: Kernel.open Ignores :binmode Key in Opts Hash w.r.t Encoding
[#30602] The `open` Methods and Their Many Arguments — Run Paint Run Run <runrun@...>
I'm documenting Kernel.open, and the related .open methods, for a book
[#30607] [Bug #3395] Ruby does not appear to build against openssl-1.0.0a — Rebecca Menessecc <redmine@...>
Bug #3395: Ruby does not appear to build against openssl-1.0.0a
[#30656] Promote RubyInstaller as better alternative in ruby-lang.org — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
[#30672] [Bug #3411] Time.local 1916,5,1 #=> 1916-04-30 23:00:00 +0100 — Benoit Daloze <redmine@...>
Bug #3411: Time.local 1916,5,1 #=> 1916-04-30 23:00:00 +0100
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Benoit Daloze <redmine@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#30697] [Bug #3418] IO#putc Clobbers Multi-byte Characters — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #3418: IO#putc Clobbers Multi-byte Characters
[#30707] [Bug #3420] Module#method calling <=> causes SystemStackError — Florian Aßmann <redmine@...>
Bug #3420: Module#method calling <=> causes SystemStackError
[#30722] [Feature #3424] Source code interaction. [new ideas for ruby 2] — Eloy Esp <redmine@...>
Feature #3424: Source code interaction. [new ideas for ruby 2]
[#30734] [Bug #3428] ri outputs ansi escape sequences even when stdout is not a tty — caleb clausen <redmine@...>
Bug #3428: ri outputs ansi escape sequences even when stdout is not a tty
[#30756] [Feature #3436] Spawn the timer thread lazily — Maximilian Gass <redmine@...>
Feature #3436: Spawn the timer thread lazily
Issue #3436 has been updated by Mark Somerville.
Hi,
(2010/10/08 15:12), Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 11:12:47PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 01:27:53AM +0900, Mark Somerville wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 02:21:41AM +0900, Mark Somerville wrote:
[#30799] PATCH: ENV['key'] = non_string — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Can I commit this please? This drives me bonkers.
Hi,
[#30821] [Bug #3454] Segfault with syscall — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>
Bug #3454: Segfault with syscall
[#30855] requires in 1.9 are slower... — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
Hi all.
[#30882] Was 1.8.7-p299 announced here? — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello, tried to look for the release notes or a link, just found the
[#30891] [Feature #3478] Excruciatingly slow pathname implementation — Stephen Touset <redmine@...>
Issue #3478 has been updated by Stephen Touset.
[#30913] String#rindex is faster with Regexps than with Strings? — Kornelius Kalnbach <murphy@...>
hi,
[#30917] [Bug #3487] fiddle pushes arguments in a wrong format — Yuki Sonoda <redmine@...>
Bug #3487: fiddle pushes arguments in a wrong format
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:36:45PM +0900, Yuki Sonoda wrote:
[#30927] undefined reference to 'rb_encdb_declare'; ruby-1.9.2-preview3 64-bit on Windows — Chuck Remes <cremes.devlist@...>
[cross-posted to rubyinstaller ML]
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Chuck Remes <cremes.devlist@mac.com> wrote:
[#30968] ironruby vs ruby — "C.E. Thornton" <admin@...>
Matz,
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:25 AM, C.E. Thornton
Note that Antonio's benchmark compares 64bit IronRuby build against 32bit 1.8.7 MRI and thus favoring MRI.
[ruby-core:30849] Re: [Bug #3350] Protected methods & documentation
Hi, On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Yusuke ENDOH <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote: > Because whether protected methods can be called are context-sensitive. > ... > Object#methods may be also context-sensitive (IOW, Object#methods > returns different results depending on where it is called), but the > behavior is more difficult (for me) to understand than current one. Sorry for the delay. Yes, I agree with all this. I still wonder what actual cases exist where one wants to call respond_to? and get true on a protected method. I would assume that you usually know what objects of your class respond to and that you typically do not need to use duck typing this way. On the other hand, other classes know nothing in general about your classes and in cases of duck typing can be confused by a protected method that they can't actually call. I think that obj.respond_to?(:foo) should return false even if obj has a protected method foo.