[#33000] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4014][Open] Case-Sensitivity of Property Names Depends on Regexp Encoding — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>

Bug #4014: Case-Sensitivity of Property Names Depends on Regexp Encoding

11 messages 2010/11/01

[#33021] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4015][Open] File::DIRECT Constant for O_DIRECT — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

Hi,

15 messages 2010/11/02

[#33139] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4044][Open] Regex matching errors when using \W character class and /i option — Ben Hoskings <redmine@...>

Bug #4044: Regex matching errors when using \W character class and /i option

8 messages 2010/11/11

[#33162] Windows Unicode (chcp 65001) Generates incorrect output — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>

Hello,

10 messages 2010/11/14

[#33246] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4068][Open] Replace current standard Date/DateTime library with home_run — Jeremy Evans <redmine@...>

Feature #4068: Replace current standard Date/DateTime library with home_run

40 messages 2010/11/17

[#33255] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4071][Open] support basic auth for Net::HTTP.get requests — "coderrr ." <redmine@...>

Feature #4071: support basic auth for Net::HTTP.get requests

23 messages 2010/11/19

[#33322] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <redmine@...>

Feature #4085: Refinements and nested methods

94 messages 2010/11/24
[#33345] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/11/25

Hi,

[#33356] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/11/25

Hi,

[#33375] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/11/25

Hi,

[#33381] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/11/25

Hi,

[#33387] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...> 2010/11/25

Woah, this is very nice stuff! Some comments/questions:

[#33487] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...> 2010/11/30

This is a long response, and for that I apologize. I want to make sure

[#33535] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/12/03

Hi,

[#33519] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/12/02

Hi,

[#33523] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/12/02

Hi,

[#33539] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/12/03

Hi,

[#33543] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/12/03

Hi,

[#33546] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/12/03

Hi,

[#33548] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2010/12/03

Hi,

[#33567] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2010/12/04

Hi,

[#33595] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085][Open] Refinements and nested methods — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...> 2010/12/06

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Shugo Maeda <shugo@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#33367] Planning to release 1.8.7 fixes on 12/25 (Japanese timezone) — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>

Hello,

20 messages 2010/11/25
[#33439] Re: Planning to release 1.8.7 fixes on 12/25 (Japanese timezone) — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...> 2010/11/27

2010/11/25 Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>:

[#33456] [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>

Hi,

25 messages 2010/11/29
[#35152] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Mark Somerville <mark@...> 2011/02/08

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:53:03AM +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:

[#36077] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Mark Somerville <mark@...> 2011/05/09

On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 09:24:13PM +0900, Mark Somerville wrote:

[#36952] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/06/10

Mark Somerville <mark@scottishclimbs.com> wrote:

[#37080] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Mark Somerville <mark@...> 2011/06/13

On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 05:57:11AM +0900, Eric Wong wrote:

[#37103] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/06/13

Mark Somerville <mark@scottishclimbs.com> wrote:

[#37187] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2011/06/16

(2011/06/14 3:37), Eric Wong wrote:

[#37195] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/06/17

SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:

[#37205] Re: [Request for Comment] avoid timer thread — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/06/17

Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:

[#33469] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4100][Open] Improve Net::HTTP documentation — Eric Hodel <redmine@...>

Feature #4100: Improve Net::HTTP documentation

12 messages 2010/11/29

[ruby-core:33427] [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4085] Refinements and nested methods

From: Chauk-Mean Proum <redmine@...>
Date: 2010-11-27 13:32:48 UTC
List: ruby-core #33427
Issue #4085 has been updated by Chauk-Mean Proum.


11/27/2010 09:46 AM - Loren Segal wrote :
>> I also prefer use instead of using.
>> May be the core team can request Rack developers to rename their use method to e.g. rack_use.
>> I guess that this new feature will be available only for ruby-1.9.3+.
>> So this leaves time for Rack developers and users to migrate their code base.
>This is really bad release engineering. You don't just change a method name because it's "strange".

Yes, I know that changes that break backward compatibility should be avoided.

>"Migrating" a codebase doesn't work when you need to support older Ruby versions,

In this case, the impact is on Rack and Web frameworks that rely on Rack (and I agree that there is lot as pointed by Konstantin). But there is no impact on older Ruby versions as refine/using is a new feature.
It is also just a proposal.

> FWIW, since you brought it up, your linked issue has the same problem of completely
> breaking backwards compat. for nothing but vanity, and I wouldn't be fond of that either.

Vanity ?
It seems that I was not alone to prefer use to using.
Regarding the proposal for renaming append_features, it was only to make the relationship with include more clear.
If other people think that this is not worth breaking the compatibility, then that's fine.

Please leave other people express their opinion, a different opinion does not mean vanity.

Chauk-Mean.

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/4085

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

In This Thread