[#36679] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4814][Open] minitest 2.2.x and test/unit do not get along — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
[#36707] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4818][Open] Add method marshalable? — Joey Zhou <yimutang@...>
[#36711] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4821][Open] Random Segfaults (in start_thread?) — Ivan Bortko <b2630639@...>
[#36714] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4822][Open] String#capitalize improvements — Anurag Priyam <anurag08priyam@...>
[#36720] Direct modifications to RubyGems in trunk? — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
[#36730] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4824][Open] Provide method Kernel#executed? — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 07:20:32AM +0900, Rocky Bernstein wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Cezary <cezary.baginski@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 11:20:31AM +0900, Rocky Bernstein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas
[#36741] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4828][Open] crash in test_thread_instance_variable — Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
[#36750] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4830][Open] Provide Default Variables for Array#each and other iterators — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
[#36764] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4831][Open] Integer#prime_factors — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
[#36785] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4840][Open] Allow returning from require — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
Hello,
Hi,
Em 23-07-2012 10:12, mame (Yusuke Endoh) escreveu:
On Jun 6, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
On 07/06/2011, at 12:18 AM, Michael Edgar wrote:
(2012/07/24 0:44), alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) wrote:
[#36787] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4841][Open] WEBrick threading leads to infinite loop — Peak Xu <peak.xu+ruby@...>
[#36799] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4845][Open] Provide Class#cb_object_instantiated_from_literal(object) — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
[#36834] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #3905] rb_clear_cache_by_class() called often during GC for non-blocking I/O — Charles Nutter <headius@...>
Charles Nutter <headius@headius.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:
Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@headius.com> wrote:
[#36863] Object#trust vs Object#taint — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
Hi,
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:49:06AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Aaron Patterson
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Shugo Maeda <shugo@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Shugo Maeda <shugo@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#37071] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4877][Open] Unify Variable Expansion within Strings — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
[#37106] ruby core tutorials location — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
Hello all.
> Hello all.
> 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.
> > 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.
> 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.
> > 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.
> My feedback was specific to the suggestion of embedding links into the Ruby source tree, not the issue of whether more documentation is needed. For the tutorials scenario you raised, I believe links from http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/documentation/ (e.g. - a new Tutorials section) are a more adaptable and maintainable _implementation_ for dealing with documentation realities than links in source.
[#37139] [Bug: ruby-1.9] test-all on without openssl system — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
[#37144] Ruby 1.8.6 status — Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
Hi.
[#37164] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4890][Open] Enumerable#lazy — Yutaka HARA <redmine@...>
[#37170] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4893][Open] Literal Instantiation breaks Object Model — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
[#37192] rb_w32_add_socket / rb_w32_remove_socket — ghazel@...
Hello,
[#37206] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4896][Open] Add newpad() support to Curses — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
[#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@...>
Issue #4897 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
[#37217] coerce — Ondřej Bílka <neleai@...>
Hello
2011/6/18 Ondřej Bílka <neleai@seznam.cz>:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 04:06:05PM +0900, Robert Klemme wrote:
2011/6/21 Ondřej Bílka <neleai@seznam.cz>:
[#37265] Re: Welcome to our (ruby-core ML) You are added automatically — "Anthony Crognale" <anthony@...>
mget last:10 mp
[#37286] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4916][Open] [BUG] Segmentation fault - dyld: lazy symbol binding failed: Symbol not found: _ASN1_put_eoc — Hiroshi NAKAMURA <nakahiro@...>
[#37288] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4917][Open] NilClass#to_ary — Jay Feldblum <y_feldblum@...>
[#37289] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4918][Assigned] Make all core tests inherit from Test::Unit::TestCase — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>
[#37336] I have imported Rake 0.9.2 to trunk — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
I asked Jim if he would like me to import rake 0.9.2 to trunk, so I have.
[#37401] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #3784] Seg fault in webrick — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>
[#37463] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4480][Assigned] Thread-local variables issue: Thread#[] returns nil when called first time — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>
[#37546] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4934][Open] winsock listen backlog may only be set once, and is set to 5 — Greg Hazel <ghazel@...>
[#37551] [ANN] Ruby Weekly Report — "Shota Fukumori (sora_h)" <sorah@...>
Hi,
[#37576] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4938][Open] Add Random.bytes [patch] — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>
[#37588] CI? — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Is this an official CI for ruby?
(2011/06/28 6:28), Ryan Davis wrote:
[#37612] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4941][Open] cannot load such file -- rubygems.rb (LoadError) — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>
[ruby-core:37369] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #1906][Assigned] Kernel#backtrace: Objectifying Kernel#caller
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