[#39810] 2.0 feature questionnaire — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>

I made a questionnaire "What do you want to introduce in 2.0?" in my

59 messages 2011/10/01
[#39822] Re: 2.0 feature questionnaire — Jeremy Kemper <jeremy@...> 2011/10/02

2011/10/1 SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net>:

[#39827] Re: 2.0 feature questionnaire — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/02

Hi,

[#40324] Re: 2.0 feature questionnaire — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...> 2011/10/25

2011/10/1 SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net>:

[#39823] Discussion results — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>

Hi,

34 messages 2011/10/02
[#39840] Re: Discussion results — Intransition <transfire@...> 2011/10/02

I did not have the fortune of attending the discussion, but I would

[#39844] Re: Discussion results — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/02

Hi,

[#39851] Re: Discussion results (here documents with indents) — "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@...> 2011/10/03

Hello Matz,

[#39862] Re: Discussion results (here documents with indents) — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...> 2011/10/03

Hello,

[#39874] Re: Discussion results (here documents with indents) — Trans <transfire@...> 2011/10/03

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:

[#39915] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5400][Open] Remove flip-flops in 2.0 — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>

29 messages 2011/10/04

[#39957] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5407][Open] Cannot build ruby-1.9.3-rc1 with TDM-GCC 4.6.1 on Windows XP SP3 — Heesob Park <phasis@...>

11 messages 2011/10/05

[#39993] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #2348] RBTree Should be Added to the Standard Library — David Graham <david.malcom.graham@...>

10 messages 2011/10/06

[#40037] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5422][Open] File.fnmatch != Dir.glob # {no,sets} — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>

14 messages 2011/10/07

[#40073] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5427][Open] Not complex patch to improve `require` time (load.c) — Yura Sokolov <funny.falcon@...>

31 messages 2011/10/09

[#40090] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5433][Open] PTY.spawn Kernel panic on macos lion — Gamaliel Toro <argami@...>

14 messages 2011/10/10

[#40188] [Ruby 2.0 - Feature #5454] keyword arguments — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

16 messages 2011/10/17
[#40189] Re: [Ruby 2.0 - Feature #5454] keyword arguments — Evan Phoenix <evan@...> 2011/10/17

This looks very interesting! Would someone be willing to translate to english? I've only got a vague idea of what is being discussed.

[#40191] Re: [Ruby 2.0 - Feature #5454] keyword arguments — Yutaka Hara <yutaka.hara@...> 2011/10/18

Hi,

[#40192] Re: [Ruby 2.0 - Feature #5454] keyword arguments — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/18

Hi,

[#40259] Counseling — Perry Smith <pedzsan@...>

Ruby and I are back in counseling... Its always the same thing with her. "I'm throwing an Encoding exception!!!"

21 messages 2011/10/21
[#40263] Re: Counseling — "Haase, Konstantin" <Konstantin.Haase@...> 2011/10/21

What's your $LC_CTYPE? What OS are you on?

[#40264] Re: Counseling — Gon軋lo Silva <goncalossilva@...> 2011/10/21

Hi all,

[#40266] Re: Counseling — Bill Kelly <billk@...> 2011/10/21

Gon軋lo Silva wrote:

[#40267] Re: Counseling — Perry Smith <pedzsan@...> 2011/10/22

[#40268] Re: Counseling — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2011/10/22

On Oct 21, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Perry Smith wrote:

[#40269] Re: Counseling — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...> 2011/10/22

To try and cut to the core of the issue: in Ruby 1.8 it was common practice to use the String class to represent both "proper strings" as well as a "bag-o-bytes". In Ruby 1.9, you can only properly use the String class to represent "proper strings". For a "bag-o-bytes" we're left with Array, but there are times when Array is not the right abstraction (e.g. reading data from a socket, identifying a start and stop token, and writing the bytes between to a file on disk). Also, the "BINARY" encoding is not the right abstraction, because you still have an object which will worry about encodings and, due to Ruby always trying to do "the right thing", bugs can be very difficult to track down. Consider:

[#40271] Can rubygems save us from "binary-compatibility hell"? — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>

Hello, rubygems developers --

17 messages 2011/10/22

[#40290] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>

36 messages 2011/10/23
[#40414] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...> 2011/10/26

More refinement below. I think we're on a good path here.

[#40416] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/26

Hi,

[#40418] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...> 2011/10/26

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>wrote:

[#40425] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/27

Hi,

[#40298] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/10/24

Hi,

[#40311] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5478][Open] import Set into core, add syntax — Konstantin Haase <Konstantin.Haase@...>

33 messages 2011/10/24

[#40312] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5479][Open] import StringIO into core, add String#to_io — Konstantin Haase <Konstantin.Haase@...>

9 messages 2011/10/24
[#40350] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5479] import StringIO into core, add String#to_io — Charles Nutter <headius@...> 2011/10/25

[#40316] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5481][Open] Gemifying Ruby standard library — Hiroshi Nakamura <nakahiro@...>

86 messages 2011/10/24
[#40334] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5481] Gemifying Ruby standard library — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2011/10/25

[#40322] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5482][Open] Rubinius as basis for Ruby 2.0 — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>

19 messages 2011/10/25

[#40356] JIT development for MRI — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...>

Hello,

25 messages 2011/10/25
[#40390] Re: JIT development for MRI — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2011/10/26

Hi,

[#40394] Re: JIT development for MRI — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...> 2011/10/26

Dear Koichi SASADA,

[#40395] Re: JIT development for MRI — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...> 2011/10/26

I noticed that you used context threading in YARV. Do you have some analysis

[#40417] Re: JIT development for MRI — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2011/10/26

Thanks for reference.

[#40423] Re: JIT development for MRI — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...> 2011/10/26

Thanks Koichi.

[#40412] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5486][Open] rb_stat() doesn’t respect input encoding — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

15 messages 2011/10/26

[#40462] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5492][Open] MinGW Installation with Ruby 1.9.3rc1 Broken — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>

14 messages 2011/10/27

[#40573] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5530][Open] SEEK_SET malfunctions when used with 'append' File.open mode — "Joshua J. Drake" <ruby-lang.jdrake@...>

17 messages 2011/10/31

[#40586] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5531][Open] deep_value for dealing with nested hashes — Kyle Peyton <kylepeyton@...>

19 messages 2011/10/31

[ruby-core:39844] Re: Discussion results

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2011-10-02 21:38:13 UTC
List: ruby-core #39844
Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-core:39840] Re: Discussion results"
    on Mon, 3 Oct 2011 03:36:02 +0900, Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> writes:

|I did not have the fortune of attending the discussion, but I would
|like to put forth some notions I've had/seen for Ruby 2.0:
|
|1) Go through ActiveSupport core extensions and Ruby Facets to find
|most popular and useful methods and port them over. Good examples are
|String #indent, #tab, #tabto, #to_h/#to_hash methods, Hash#rekey,
|#blank, those have been useful to me. I'm sure others have their own
|favorites too --take a poll or do some code analysis to figure out
|which ones.

Activesupport is just fine by itself.  I am not that positive to merge
anything from Activesupport, unless there is some very specific reason
to merge to the core.  I have merged Symbol#to_proc from Activesupport
in the past, but slight behavioral difference caused problems.

|2) Make toplevel a self extended module instead of a weak proxy of
|Object. Besides being conceptually easier to understand, it would
|allow DSL scripts to run at toplevel without worry of infecting
|Object. This would have been a huge boon for me in couple of my
|projects, such as my test framework --instead I had to write my own
|toplevel-like proxy to fake it, which is inevitably imperfect and just
|pain to have to do.

I don't understand what would satisfy you.  Could elaborate rather
than forcing me to guess your intention?

|3)  Add margin literal, e.g.
|
|    > %L|This is
|        |  margin
|        |    controlled.
|    => "This is\n  margin\n    controlled."
|
|Nothing sucks more for readability than having to flush a literal
|string to the left margin in the middle of indented code.

Use here documents.  At least above syntax requires huge overhaul of
the lexer/parser, that I don't think worth it.

|4) Treat `@` as a hash object, so @['foo'] is the same as @foo. This
|would make it much easier to work with instance variables, e.g.
|@.each{ |k,v| ... }

I am not positive about this proposal.  It is not intuitive.

|5) Better support for lazy and differed processing, e.g. lazy.rb and
|denumerable.rb.

I agree.  I like lazy. That would be a good candidate to be merged in.
I know little about denumerable.  I will investigate later.

|6) Add High-order Function to language but more tightly integrated to
|remove inefficiencies of pure-Ruby implementation. This is great
|device for making robust fluent notations.

Be more specific.  What would code look like by using it?

|7) Lastly, I think serious consideration should be given to removing
|the distinction between class and module. The distinction is purely a
|conceptual one that has built artificial limitations and undo
|complications into the language. What difference does it make to Bar
|if we include Bar, subclass Bar or instantiate Bar? Bar shouldn't have
|to care --it's just an encapsulation.

I am sorry but I'd have to say no.  Distinction between class and
module is very important for the fundamental OO design policy of Ruby
language.  I really like the simplicity of Ruby's mix-in system.
Removing the distinction would mean going back to multiple
inheritance, which I hate.

Of course I know multiple inheritance works just fine for many cases,
but this is my language, so it will follow my preference.


In message "Re: [ruby-core:39842] Re: Discussion results"
    on Mon, 3 Oct 2011 03:44:14 +0900, Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> writes:
|
|Oh, how could I forget:
|
|8) Open up access to the internal methods for looking up scripts used
|to find files in the $LOAD_PATH. Use of this is plugin file loaders.

It is under discussion.  Even though I am not positive about
disclosing internals of #require, it might be useful for some cases.

|9) autoload needs use an overridable require method of some sort. I
|use a custom load manager for developement, but since I can't get hold
|of autoload's require I can't use autoload in my projects, which
|majorly sucks!!!

I hate autoload.  autoload is one of things I regret.  I'm not
positive about enhancing something that I hate.

							matz.

In This Thread