[#3907] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...>

The attached patch implements IO#mode. This method returns the mode the IO

17 messages 2004/12/06
[#3909] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — nobu.nokada@... 2004/12/07

Hi,

[#3910] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2004/12/07

On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:25:13AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

[#3925] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — James Britt <ruby@...> 2004/12/09

Jos Backus wrote:

[#4009] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — mde@...26.com

First of all, I think it would be great, as Eustaquio suggests, to

17 messages 2004/12/23
[#4016] Re: [PATCH] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — Francis Hwang <sera@...> 2004/12/24

GETs and POSTs are defined to be fairly different actions. I'd read

[#4027] Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...>

Moin!

35 messages 2004/12/27
[#4070] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — nobu.nokada@... 2005/01/02

Hi,

[#4072] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/02

[#4079] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...> 2005/01/03

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

[#4081] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/03

[#4082] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...> 2005/01/03

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

[#4084] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2005/01/04

I'm not sure I would advocate making Ruby's grammar even more

[#4086] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/04

[#4033] Garbage collection trouble — Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>

Hello,

13 messages 2004/12/27

[bug] serious memory leak + continuations

From: Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Date: 2004-12-21 13:33:47 UTC
List: ruby-core #3993
Hi,

ruby 1.9.0 (2004-12-20) [i386-freebsd5.2.1]
gcc version 3.3.3 [FreeBSD] 20031106

In my application, if I change:

    # (1) this works
    callback_stream.with_callbacks_for(self, :action) { |callback, val|
       catch(:something) { callback.call }
       throw :wee_back_to_session
     }

into:

    # (2) this leaks
    callback_stream.with_callbacks_for(self, :action) { |callback, val|
       res = catch(:something) { callback.call }
       throw :wee_back_to_session
     }

or into:

     # (3) this leaks
     callback_stream.with_callbacks_for(self, :action) { |callback, val|
       callback.call
       throw :wee_back_to_session
     }

memory consumption is unbounded! BTW, ":something" is never thrown. It 
seems that if I reference the return value of callback.call, the memory 
leak appears. The leak also happens if I change "res = " in (2) into 
"@res = " or "$res = ". Note that inside callback.call continuations are 
created.

And if I return "nil" from the block (callback.call), it leaks, too, 
even if I use code sample (1).

I tried above example also with ruby-stable compiled with 2.95.4 (-O0 
enabled), but there all three examples leak memory.

It seems to be related to the "unknown node type 0 bug", as it appears 
to be pretty random (at least in my eyes):

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/123694


Help! I can send the whole sources to someone who is interested. Only 
requirements are rubygems, installed narf gem (webunit) and gnuplot to 
display memory consumption, and of course *nix.

Regards,

    Michael

In This Thread

Prev Next