[#35027] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4352][Open] [patch] Fix eval(s, b) backtrace; make eval(s, b) consistent with eval(s) — "James M. Lawrence" <redmine@...>

Bug #4352: [patch] Fix eval(s, b) backtrace; make eval(s, b) consistent with eval(s)

16 messages 2011/02/01

[#35114] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4373][Open] http.rb:677: [BUG] Segmentation fault — Christian Fazzini <redmine@...>

Bug #4373: http.rb:677: [BUG] Segmentation fault

59 messages 2011/02/06

[#35171] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4386][Open] encoding: directive does not affect regex expressions — mathew murphy <redmine@...>

Bug #4386: encoding: directive does not affect regex expressions

9 messages 2011/02/09

[#35237] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4400][Open] nested at_exit hooks run in strange order — Suraj Kurapati <redmine@...>

Bug #4400: nested at_exit hooks run in strange order

12 messages 2011/02/15

[ruby-core:35188] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4386][Feedback] encoding: directive does not affect regex expressions

From: Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
Date: 2011-02-10 15:09:32 UTC
List: ruby-core #35188
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Usaku NAKAMURA <redmine@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> IMHO, the US-ASCII fallback of regexp literals is a spec bug of ruby.
> The encoding of regexp literals should be the same as script encoding, like string literals.

I found it unusual until we started digging into regexp parsing logic
for JRuby. As far as I can tell, the change to US-ASCII is a very
explicit decision, to allow the widest-possible functionality for a
regexp that only needs to match 7-bit ASCII text. Limiting it to only
the encoding specified for the file would mean ASCII-only regexps
could not (necessarily) be used to match a variety of other encodings,
even though logically they'd match just fine.

- Charlie

In This Thread