[#31647] [Backport #3666] Backport of r26311 (Bug #2587) — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>

Backport #3666: Backport of r26311 (Bug #2587)

13 messages 2010/08/07

[#31666] [Bug #3677] unable to run certain gem binaries' in windows 7 — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #3677: unable to run certain gem binaries' in windows 7

10 messages 2010/08/10

[#31676] [Backport #3680] Splatting calls to_ary instead of to_a in some cases — Tomas Matousek <redmine@...>

Backport #3680: Splatting calls to_ary instead of to_a in some cases

10 messages 2010/08/11

[#31681] [Bug #3683] getgrnam on computer with NIS group (+)? — Rocky Bernstein <redmine@...>

Bug #3683: getgrnam on computer with NIS group (+)?

13 messages 2010/08/11

[#31843] Garbage Collection Question — Asher <asher@...>

This question is no doubt a function of my own lack of understanding, but I think that asking it will at least help some other folks see what's going on with the internals during garbage collection.

17 messages 2010/08/25
[#31861] Re: Garbage Collection Question — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2010/08/26

> The question in short: when an object goes out of scope and has no

[#31862] Re: Garbage Collection Question — Asher <asher@...> 2010/08/26

Right - so how does a pointer ever get off the stack?

[#31873] Re: Garbage Collection Question — Kurt Stephens <ks@...> 2010/08/27

On 8/26/10 11:51 AM, Asher wrote:

[#31894] Re: Garbage Collection Question — Asher <asher@...> 2010/08/27

I very much appreciate the response, and this is helpful in describing the narrative, but it's still a few steps behind my question - but it may very well have clarified some points that help us get there.

[#31896] Re: Garbage Collection Question — Evan Phoenix <evan@...> 2010/08/27

You have introduced something called a "root node" without defining it. What do you mean by this?

[#31885] Avoiding $LOAD_PATH pollution — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>

Last year Nobu asked me to propose an API for adding an object to

21 messages 2010/08/27

[#31947] not use system for default encoding — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>

It strikes me as a bit "scary" to use system locale settings to

19 messages 2010/08/30

[#31971] Change Ruby's License to BSDL + Ruby's dual license — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>

Ruby's License will change to BSDL + Ruby's dual license

16 messages 2010/08/31

[ruby-core:31791] Re: [Feature #3715] Enumerator#size and #size=

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2010-08-20 04:25:37 UTC
List: ruby-core #31791
Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-core:31785] [Feature #3715] Enumerator#size and #size="
    on Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:08:44 +0900, Run Paint Run Run <redmine@ruby-lang.org> writes:

|An enumerator is effectively immutable. The existence of #size= and
|potentially invoking a Proc for each call to #size, implies that its
|maximum size will change over the course of the iteration. Is this
|likely? If not, we can remove #size=, and treat the Proc as a thunk,
|which would be simpler and faster.

We have discussed the issue in the ruby-dev before.  The conclusion we
had then was that:

  * it is nice to have a way to tell the number of items without
    actual iteration.
  * but Enumerator#size is not a good API, since not all enumerators
    would have the way to tell the numbers of items.  Permutations and
    combinations are rather exceptions.
  * Enumerator#size= was worse, since it would make enumerators mutable.
  * we haven't got the better API after some discussion, so we
    preferred not adding it to adding unsatisfying #size.

							matz.

In This Thread