[#32009] merging nokogiri to ext/ — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

I would like to merge nokogiri to ext for the 1.9.3 release. I spoke to

82 messages 2010/09/02
[#32010] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — "U.Nakamura" <usa@...> 2010/09/02

Hello,

[#32012] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2010/09/02

[#32030] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2010/09/03

Hi,

[#32033] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2010/09/03

2010/9/3 NARUSE, Yui <naruse@airemix.jp>:

[#32155] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/09/08

Currently, we're discussing three different topics:

[#32189] Re: merging nokogiri to ext/ — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2010/09/09

On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 01:40:34AM +0900, Yusuke ENDOH wrote:

[#32056] [Ruby 1.8-Bug#3788][Open] URI cannot parse IPv6 addresses propertly — Adam Majer <redmine@...>

Bug #3788: URI cannot parse IPv6 addresses propertly

16 messages 2010/09/04

[#32110] Ruby 2.0 Wiki/Wish-list? — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>

Hi all,

41 messages 2010/09/07
[#32114] Re: Ruby 2.0 Wiki/Wish-list? — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2010/09/08

2010/9/8 Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@gmail.com>:

[#32117] Re: Ruby 2.0 Wiki/Wish-list? — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...> 2010/09/08

On Sep 7, 2010, at 5:21 PM, NARUSE, Yui wrote:

[#32143] Re: Ruby 2.0 Wiki/Wish-list? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2010/09/08

> So, for example, a few things I've wanted for a long time:

[#32135] [Ruby-Bug#3802][Open] freeaddrinfo not found in WS2_32.dll — Thomas Volkmar Worm <redmine@...>

Bug #3802: freeaddrinfo not found in WS2_32.dll

16 messages 2010/09/08

[#32154] Making custom_lambda() work — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>

A tiny suggestion for how we could make it possible to call lambdas

15 messages 2010/09/08
[#32159] Re: Making custom_lambda() work — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2010/09/08

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 18:21, Magnus Holm <judofyr@gmail.com> wrote:

[#32156] Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Taken from the bundle Nokogiri thread:

98 messages 2010/09/08
[#32161] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Marcus Rueckert <darix@...> 2010/09/08

On 2010-09-09 01:45:43 +0900, James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#32166] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2010/09/08

On Sep 8, 2010, at 12:03 PM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:

[#32173] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Marcus Rueckert <darix@...> 2010/09/08

On 2010-09-09 02:54:26 +0900, James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#32249] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2010/09/09

On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 05:26:54AM +0900, Marcus Rueckert wrote:

[#32278] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2010/09/10

On 10/09/10 at 02:41 +0900, Aaron Patterson wrote:

[#32162] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/09/08

Hi,

[#32216] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2010/09/09

[#32229] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/09/09

Hi,

[#32260] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2010/09/09

[#32275] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/09/10

I'm off today so sorry if I missed some mails.

[#32293] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/10

Urabe,

[#32316] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/09/11

(2010/09/10 23:48), James Cox wrote:

[#32322] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Tucker <jftucker@...> 2010/09/11

[#32335] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/09/12

I'm at an airport back to my home so in short,

[#32343] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/12

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wr=

[#32382] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/09/14

(2010/09/13 3:54), James Cox wrote:

[#32383] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/14

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#32393] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...> 2010/09/15

How difficult to make myself understood in English.

[#32396] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/15

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wr=

[#32399] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/09/15

Hi,

[#32400] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/15

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Yusuke ENDOH <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:

[#32401] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Marcus Rueckert <darix@...> 2010/09/15

On 2010-09-16 01:42:39 +0900, James Cox wrote:

[#32402] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/15

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Marcus Rueckert <darix@opensu.se> wrote:

[#32411] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Marcus Rueckert <darix@...> 2010/09/15

On 2010-09-16 03:36:56 +0900, James Cox wrote:

[#32412] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — James Cox <james@...> 2010/09/16

On Wednesday, September 15, 2010, Marcus Rueckert <darix@opensu.se> wrote:

[#32414] Re: Can we convert the standard library to gems? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2010/09/16

On 16/09/10 at 11:02 +0900, James Cox wrote:

[#32248] Replacing stdlib Date with C version — Jeremy Evans <code@...>

I've recently been working on a replacement for the stdlib Date class,

15 messages 2010/09/09

[#32290] [Ruby 1.9.2-Backport#3818][Open] Seg fault with ruby tmail and ruby 1.9.2 — Karl Baum <redmine@...>

Backport #3818: Seg fault with ruby tmail and ruby 1.9.2

10 messages 2010/09/10

[#32453] Why doesn’t Enumerable define a #last method? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

Hi!

9 messages 2010/09/17

[#32454] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#3845][Open] "in" infix operator — Yusuke Endoh <redmine@...>

Feature #3845: "in" infix operator

20 messages 2010/09/17
[#32489] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#3845][Open] "in" infix operator — Benoit Daloze <eregontp@...> 2010/09/21

On 17 September 2010 12:30, Yusuke Endoh <redmine@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#32529] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#3869][Open] Logger#log does not handle or escape new-line characters. — Hal Brodigan <redmine@...>

Bug #3869: Logger#log does not handle or escape new-line characters.

9 messages 2010/09/23

[#32585] Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Martin Pilkington <pilky@...>

Hi,

47 messages 2010/09/27
[#32588] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2010/09/27

Hi,

[#32592] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Martin Pilkington <pilky@...> 2010/09/28

Hi Matz

[#32595] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Asher <asher@...> 2010/09/28

Martin,

[#32611] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Loren Segal <lsegal@...> 2010/09/28

Hi,

[#32628] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby — Eleanor McHugh <eleanor@...> 2010/09/29

It strikes me that much of the premise behind this thread is misguided =

[#32634] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#3889][Open] Incorrectly detected i686-w64-mingw32 as x64-mingw — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>

Bug #3889: Incorrectly detected i686-w64-mingw32 as x64-mingw

21 messages 2010/09/29

[ruby-core:32588] Re: Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2010-09-27 15:29:08 UTC
List: ruby-core #32588
Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-core:32585] Proposal for Optional Static Typing for Ruby"
    on Mon, 27 Sep 2010 20:58:51 +0900, Martin Pilkington <pilky@mcubedsw.com> writes:

|I know this is my first post on this list and that I'm relatively new to the Ruby community, and that this can be a somewhat controversial topic (as I've found by asking about it on the #ruby-lang channel). 

Short response:

  "I'm not against types, but I don't know of any type systems that
  aren't a complete pain, so I still like dynamic typing." - Alan Kay

Static typing surely has its benefit, but on the other hand, Ruby the
language strongly encourages duck typing, so that its type system
should not hinder duck typing.  As a result, the type checking should
be based on structural types, not nominal types.  I don't think your
proposal cares about duck typing or considered structural type
conformance.

Although I like your <type> notation, that reminds me the scheme
object system, iff we don't have to write them often.  I don't think I
could stand to write <type> everywhere.

							matz.

In This Thread