[#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:37643] Re: I have imported Rake 0.9.2 to trunk
Luis Lavena escreveu isso a躡 > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonio Terceiro > <terceiro@softwarelivre.org> wrote: > > Hello Eric, > > > > Eric Hodel escreveu isso a躡 > >> I asked Jim if he would like me to import rake 0.9.2 to trunk, so I have.. > >> > >> Let me know if there are any problems. > >> > >> PS: I broke `make install` r32217 but fixed it with r32218 > > > > What are the reasons that led to the inclusion of rake (and e.g. > > rubygems) in Ruby's standard library in the first place? > > > > Rake has been part of Ruby 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 since their releases. Rake > has become a commonly used tool, like RubyGems. > > Ruby also includes JSON as part of it, and RDoc, these tools evolved > form independent ones to be part of Ruby itself with time. I already knew that those things are widely used and that they got included in Ruby 1.9 ... ;-) What happens in practice, though, is that people will always install the latest Rubygems and the latest Rake from within Rubygems, regardless of the versions included in Ruby 1.9.x Why I asked this: I am part of the Debian Ruby packaging team, and we started to discuss how to deal with the following issue: We have Rubygems and Rake packages for Ruby 1.8, but not for Ruby 1.9 because they are already included. What happens then is that users of Ruby 1.8 end up having newer versions of both Rubygems and Rake, and Ruby 1.9 users end up with whatever version was included with Ruby, which are often outdated with regard to the current versions of the standalone packages. If we decide to make the Debian packages for Rubygems, Rake etc available for both Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9, we will be in practive overriding the versions bundled with Ruby. I have the feeling that doing this reproduces what non-Debian users already do: they install these packages regardless of the fact they are already bundled with Ruby, either manually or because some others packages depend explicitly on them (e.g. several gems depend on rake, and that will cause Rubygems to install a standalone rake package). It has been suggested that Ruby 1.9 could have way of disabling the bundled packages on ./configure so that they don't get installed on `make install`, and we could then make the Debian packages explicitly depend on Rubygems/Rake/etc so that users always get the newest version of them together with Ruby 1.9. We don't want to have a Debian-specific patch for that, so we wanted the opinion of Ruby core. What do people think about that? -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@softwarelivre.org> http://softwarelivre.org/terceiro