[#36711] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4821][Open] Random Segfaults (in start_thread?) — Ivan Bortko <b2630639@...>

22 messages 2011/06/03

[#36730] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4824][Open] Provide method Kernel#executed? — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

56 messages 2011/06/04

[#36750] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4830][Open] Provide Default Variables for Array#each and other iterators — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

24 messages 2011/06/05

[#36785] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4840][Open] Allow returning from require — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

53 messages 2011/06/06
[#36811] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4840][Open] Allow returning from require — Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...> 2011/06/07

Hello,

[#36799] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4845][Open] Provide Class#cb_object_instantiated_from_literal(object) — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

11 messages 2011/06/06

[#36834] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #3905] rb_clear_cache_by_class() called often during GC for non-blocking I/O — Charles Nutter <headius@...>

10 messages 2011/06/08
[#36860] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #3905] rb_clear_cache_by_class() called often during GC for non-blocking I/O — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2011/06/08

Charles Nutter <headius@headius.com> wrote:

[#36863] Object#trust vs Object#taint — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

Hi,

16 messages 2011/06/08
[#36866] Re: Object#trust vs Object#taint — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/06/08

Hi,

[#36873] Re: Object#trust vs Object#taint — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2011/06/09

On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:49:06AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#37071] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4877][Open] Unify Variable Expansion within Strings — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

12 messages 2011/06/12

[#37106] ruby core tutorials location — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>

Hello all.

10 messages 2011/06/13
[#37107] Re: ruby core tutorials location — Jon <jon.forums@...> 2011/06/13

> Hello all.

[#37115] Re: ruby core tutorials location — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2011/06/13

> Rather than adding links to source code, I would prefer the wikibooks link and others under a new Tutorials section of http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/ as well as adding http://ruby.runpaint.org/ to the existing Getting Started section.

[#37117] Re: ruby core tutorials location — Jon <jon.forums@...> 2011/06/13

> > Rather than adding links to source code, I would prefer the wikibooks link and others under a new Tutorials section of http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/ as well as adding http://ruby.runpaint.org/ to the existing Getting Started section.

[#37128] Re: ruby core tutorials location — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...> 2011/06/14

> I like what you're trying to do and see how great that tutorial connection from rdoc/yard could be, say, mixing with existing ruby-doc.org and rubydoc.info. ut I question embedding source links to info in which the info can easily grow outdated or abandoned as time passes. I also question the ongoing maintenance burdens.

[#37137] Re: ruby core tutorials location — Jon <jon.forums@...> 2011/06/14

> > I like what you're trying to do and see how great that tutorial connection from rdoc/yard could be, say, mixing with existing ruby-doc.org and rubydoc.info. ut I question embedding source links to info in which the info can easily grow outdated or abandoned as time passes. I also question the ongoing maintenance burdens.

[#37164] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4890][Open] Enumerable#lazy — Yutaka HARA <redmine@...>

30 messages 2011/06/16

[#37170] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4893][Open] Literal Instantiation breaks Object Model — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

61 messages 2011/06/16

[#37207] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4897][Open] Define Math::TAU and BigMath.TAU. The "true" circle constant, Tau=2*Pi. See http://tauday.com/ — Simon Baird <simon.baird@...>

43 messages 2011/06/17

[#37286] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4916][Open] [BUG] Segmentation fault - dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: _ASN1_put_eoc — Hiroshi NAKAMURA <nakahiro@...>

9 messages 2011/06/22

[#37324] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4923][Open] [ext/openssl] test_ssl.rb: test_client_auth fails — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>

19 messages 2011/06/23

[#37576] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4938][Open] Add Random.bytes [patch] — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>

13 messages 2011/06/27

[#37612] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4941][Open] cannot load such file -- rubygems.rb (LoadError) — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

25 messages 2011/06/28

[ruby-core:37369] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #1906][Assigned] Kernel#backtrace: Objectifying Kernel#caller

From: Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>
Date: 2011-06-26 05:08:46 UTC
List: ruby-core #37369
Issue #1906 has been updated by Yui NARUSE.

Status changed from Open to Assigned
Assignee set to Yukihiro Matsumoto


----------------------------------------
Feature #1906: Kernel#backtrace: Objectifying Kernel#caller
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/1906

Author: Run Paint Run Run
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: core
Target version: 1.9.x


=begin
 Inspired by nobu's recent refactoring of Kernel#rand`, several conversations with Ruby implementors about Kernel#caller, and Rubinius' Backtrace class, I've put together a _rough_ demo of how we could "objectify" Kernel#caller. It's at http://tinyurl.com/m9fdrn [github.com], along with some initial specs.
 
 Rationale
 =========
 
 `caller` has two principle uses: 
 
 * Allowing users to display the backtrace at a given point, e.g. `puts caller`.
 * Introspection to determine the callpath that lead the current method.
 
 The first use is reasonably achievable with `caller`, as long as you don't want to do any formatting of the output. The second is hard because it requires parsing lines of the `caller` Array with regular expressions, and knowing what the various permutations of output imply. It would be easier if we could inspect the call stack with a Ruby-ish API. Further, this would allow alternative implementations to provide this functionality without having to reverse-engineer the output of `caller`. As a result, backtraces would become more useful and code using them more portable.
 
 Name
 ====
 
 The advantage of calling this feature #backtrace is that it's consistent with the usage of the term by Thread and Exception. This, however, could also be construed as a disadvantage because although identically named the output would be materially different. I'm not sure of the best approach in this regard.
 
 API
 ===
 
 A Kernel method named, for sake of argument, 'backtrace' which returns a Backtrace object. It can be treated like an Array, in the same way `caller` is, because it's an Enumerable. It also has shortcuts for accessing the most recent entry on the stack. Each line in the backtrace is represented by a Backtrace::Line object which has #file, #line, and #name accessors which correspond to the filename, the line number, and the method name, respectively. For example:
 
     backtrace.name # The name of the method which invoked the current one as a Symbol
     backtrace.file(2) # The absolute filename of the 3rd entry in the backtrace
     backtrace.each do |line| # Yields Line objects
       puts line.method
     end
     backtrace.lines.select {|l| l.method == :foo} # #lines returns an Array of Line objects
 
 Simple stuff.
 
 Weaknesses
 ==========
 
 Ideally, #name (not called #method because of the clash with Object#method) would return a Method object. One of the many advantages of this would be that we could combine backtraces with Method#parameters to display the signatures of each method. Unfortunately, I can't see a non-hackish way to create Method objects from the output of `caller`, because I don't know which object the method is bound to. but if this were possible it would be useful.
 
 I'm currently throwing away some of the output of `caller` because I don't completely understand it. We'll need to decide whether this would be useful to expose via the API, and if so how.
 
 I'd prefer to return a File object for #file, but the majority of Ruby APIs return pathnames instead, so I've went with convention.
 
 So is there any interest in this type of thing? Is it worth exploring further?
=end



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

In This Thread

Prev Next