[#30995] [Bug #3523] win32 exception c0000029 on exit using fibers — B Kelly <redmine@...>

Bug #3523: win32 exception c0000029 on exit using fibers

19 messages 2010/07/02

[#31100] [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Ricardo Panaggio <panaggio.ricardo@...>

Hello,

26 messages 2010/07/07
[#31148] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2010/07/09

> As this it my first patch to Ruby, I don't know where to begin with.

[#31320] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Ricardo Panaggio <panaggio.ricardo@...> 2010/07/16

Sorry for leaving this thread for so long. I've tried to finish the

[#31322] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2010/07/16

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 06:55:35AM +0900, Ricardo Panaggio wrote:

[#31324] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...> 2010/07/17

NB: I am Ricardo's mentor for this project.

[#31331] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Benoit Daloze <eregontp@...> 2010/07/17

On 17 July 2010 06:00, Caleb Clausen <vikkous@gmail.com> wrote:

[#31332] Re: [rubysoc] Queue C-extension patch to come — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...> 2010/07/17

On 7/17/10, Benoit Daloze <eregontp@gmail.com> wrote:

[#31138] Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

Hi!

14 messages 2010/07/08
[#31146] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/07/09

(2010/07/09 7:04), Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#31149] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2010/07/09

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 06:20, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#31150] Re: Why is there no standard way of creating a String from a char *? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/07/09

(2010/07/09 18:28), Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#31217] [Bug #3562] regression in respond_to? — Aaron Patterson <redmine@...>

Bug #3562: regression in respond_to?

14 messages 2010/07/12

[#31269] [Bug #3566] memory leak when spawning+joining Threads in a loop — Eric Wong <redmine@...>

Bug #3566: memory leak when spawning+joining Threads in a loop

14 messages 2010/07/13

[#31399] [Backport #3595] Theres no encoding to differentiate a stream of Binary data from an 8-Bit ASCII string — Dreamcat Four <redmine@...>

Backport #3595: Theres no encoding to differentiate a stream of Binary data from an 8-Bit ASCII string

17 messages 2010/07/21

[#31459] [Bug #3607] [trunk/r28731] Gem.path has disappeared? — Ollivier Robert <redmine@...>

Bug #3607: [trunk/r28731] Gem.path has disappeared?

22 messages 2010/07/23

[#31519] [Bug #3622] Net::HTTP does not wait to send request body with Expect: 100-continue — Eric Hodel <redmine@...>

Bug #3622: Net::HTTP does not wait to send request body with Expect: 100-continue

9 messages 2010/07/28

[ruby-core:31007] Re: [Bug #3140] gem activation has changed between 1.8 and 1.9

From: Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
Date: 2010-07-02 22:07:50 UTC
List: ruby-core #31007
> We are about to ship a version of Ruby with a built in package manager with
> the following property:
> Given a package X with dependency Y, attempting to load X might require
> dependency Z without any warning.
> There is literally no other distribution of anything that would not consider
> that property a major show-stopper. I am baffled about how this bug has
> existed in the tracker so long, is considered "normal" priority, and has now
> been bumped to 1.9.3 at the earliest.

True it does require Z if Z is the same gem as X but Z has version > X
It's inaccurate, and I agree it should be fixed.

Is there any other instance where it causes a problem except for when
you have differing versions of the same gem installed?

You know what really gets me, though...

If you are using rubygems and you have

gem1/lib/xxx.rb
  its contents are
     require 'yyy'

and

gem2/lib/yyy.rb

and

gem3/lib/yyy.rb

it will choose the yyy.rb of gem2 or gem3 *arbitrarily*

That's the one that really gets me.  Yikes.  The only work around is to add a

gem 'xxx' for *every gem you ever use* which clutters the code.

Oh and the fact that rubygems downloads and installs binary gems built
against 1.8 when I'm running 1.9

That one is also tough.

> ~/Code/tmp /master > irb
> ruby-1.9.2-head > require "action_dispatch"
>  => true
> ruby-1.9.2-head > Rack.release
>  => "1.2"

Forgive me for not being familiar with rack and activesupport, but
what gem is action_dispatch in and why is this "1.2" an error?

Thanks.
-r

In This Thread