[#39810] 2.0 feature questionnaire — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
I made a questionnaire "What do you want to introduce in 2.0?" in my
2011/10/1 SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net>:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wro=
Oops, I was mentioned.
See below.
(10/07/2011 02:19 PM), Evan Phoenix wrote:
>> No, it isn't. =A0MVM-aware extensions shall obey the MVM-safe APIs.
2011/10/1 SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net>:
On Monday, October 24, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@headius.com
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Rocky Bernstein <rockyb@rubyforge.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Rocky Bernstein <rockyb@rubyforge.org>wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Tim Felgentreff <tim@nada1.de> wrote:
[#39823] Discussion results — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
I did not have the fortune of attending the discussion, but I would
Hi,
Hello Matz,
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
How does String#margin behave when given irregular input?
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Jim Freeze <jimfreeze@gmail.com> wrote:
Sent from my iPad
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Gmail <jimfreeze@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 14:16, Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
[#39824] Road to 2.0 — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
Hello,
[#39886] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5393][Open] some style fixes in enum.c docs — b t <redmine@...>
[#39888] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5394][Open] Anonymous Symbols, Anonymous Methods — Kurt Stephens <ks.ruby@...>
[#39915] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5400][Open] Remove flip-flops in 2.0 — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>
Hello,
[#39918] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5401][Open] Ruby 1.9.3 interpreter crash — Conrad Taylor <conradwt@...>
[#39937] redmine 2.0 tracker — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
There is no 2.0 tracker (sub-project) in redmine.
[#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@...>
[#39986] problems with Refinements — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...>
Hi,
There are also the group of people that think refinements are just a
Hi,
> Unfortunately, I missed Brian's talk, so we have to wait until the
Hi,
> I am not sure why
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote:
[#39993] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #2348] RBTree Should be Added to the Standard Library — David Graham <david.malcom.graham@...>
(2011.10.07 01:50 ), David Graham wrote:
On 07/10/2011, at 1:16 PM, Kenta Murata wrote:
(2011/10/07 1:50), David Graham wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:34 PM, SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#40058] Statistical Profiling — Perry Smith <pedzsan@...>
Would it be plausible to somehow, get the (ruby) stack of the running =
[#40073] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5427][Open] Not complex patch to improve `require` time (load.c) — Yura Sokolov <funny.falcon@...>
[#40117] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5437][Open] Using fibers leads to huge memory leak — Robert Pankowecki <robert.pankowecki@...>
[#40138] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5444][Open] Object.free — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
[#40172] plans for 2.0. — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...>
Hello,
2011/10/17 Carter Cheng <cartercheng@gmail.com>:
[#40188] [Ruby 2.0 - Feature #5454] keyword arguments — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
This looks very interesting=21 Would someone be willing to translate to e=
Hi,
Hi,
Thanks for the translation=21
RnJvbSB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBwYXRjaCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBtZSB0aGF0IHRoaXMgd291bGQgcmFp
[#40200] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5459][Open] Silence -Wmissing-declarations and -Wold-style-definition warnings in mkmf — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
[#40203] invoking garbage_collect in gc.c — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...>
Hello,
[#40259] Counseling — Perry Smith <pedzsan@...>
Ruby and I are back in counseling... Its always the same thing with =
What's your $LC_CTYPE? What OS are you on?
Hi all,
Gon軋lo Silva wrote:
On Oct 21, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Perry Smith wrote:
To try and cut to the core of the issue: in Ruby 1.8 it was common practi=
> What Ruby needs (IMHO), is the equivalent of Obj-C's NSData class. That is,
On Saturday, October 22, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Jon wrote:
[#40271] Can rubygems save us from "binary-compatibility hell"? — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
Hello, rubygems developers --
Forwarding this again to ruby-core as received a postmaster delivery failur=
Hello,
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
Hello,
2011/11/10 Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp>:
Hello,
Dne 22.10.2011 4:48, Yusuke Endoh napsal(a):
On Oct 31, 2011, at 2:41 PM, V=EDt Ondruch wrote:
Dne 1.11.2011 0:05, Eric Hodel napsal(a):
On Nov 1, 2011, at 2:03 PM, V=EDt Ondruch wrote:
[#40281] [Ruby 2.0 - Bug #5470][Open] r33507 and r33508 break the build under MinGW — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
[#40284] set_trace_func changed? — Intransition <transfire@...>
Did something change about `set_trace_func` between 1.8.7 and 1.9.3?
[#40290] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5474][Assigned] keyword argument — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
Hi,
Hi,
See below.
Hi,
> |> It's Python way, and I won't take it.
More refinement below. I think we're on a good path here.
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wr=
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrot=
Hi,
[#40311] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5478][Open] import Set into core, add syntax — Konstantin Haase <Konstantin.Haase@...>
On 2011-12-04, at 16:15:00, Alexey Muranov wrote:
[#40312] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5479][Open] import StringIO into core, add String#to_io — Konstantin Haase <Konstantin.Haase@...>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:14:54PM +0900, Charles Nutter wrote:
My main request was to add String#to_io, as Aaron described, so this protoc=
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 02:22:21AM +0900, Haase, Konstantin wrote:
[#40314] [ANN] 2011 Call for grant proposals — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...>
Hello,
Hello,
> Ruby reference manual for you, me and everyoneApplicant: Yutaka Hara
[#40316] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5481][Open] Gemifying Ruby standard library — Hiroshi Nakamura <nakahiro@...>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 14:45, Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
[#40322] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5482][Open] Rubinius as basis for Ruby 2.0 — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
Come back when all 1.9 features and callcc are implemented :-)
(2011/10/25 12:46), Yusuke Endoh wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:58 PM, SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Tim Felgentreff <tim@nada1.de> wrote:
[#40356] JIT development for MRI — Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...>
Hello,
Hello Charlie,
Hi,
Dear Koichi SASADA,
I noticed that you used context threading in YARV. Do you have some analysis
Thanks for reference.
Thanks Koichi.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Carter Cheng <cartercheng@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Carter,
Thanks Koichi. How do profiling based approaches differ from trace recording
[#40412] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5486][Open] rb_stat() doesn’t respect input encoding — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 07:28, Usaku NAKAMURA <redmine@ruby-lang.org> wrote=
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 08:14, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 22:41, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hello,
2012/3/15 U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp>:
[#40427] cfp consistency error — Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...>
Hi, I'm getting a cfp consistency error when I use trunk ruby. Here is
[#40453] Test case format — Jon <jon.forums@...>
I see no mention of a required (or preferred) test case format after reviewing:
2011/10/27 Jon <jon.forums@gmail.com>:
[#40489] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5497][Open] Math.log10(10_000) error on HP-UX/PA — The Written Word Inc <bugs-ruby@...>
[#40492] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5505][Open] BasicObject#__extend__ — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
[#40527] [ANN] Ruby 1.9.3-p0 is out — "Yuki Sonoda (Yugui)" <yugui@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hello,
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Yugui <yugui@yugui.jp> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Yugui <yugui@yugui.jp> wrote:
[#40562] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5525][Open] UDPSocket#bind(ip, port) fails under IPv6 => Errno::EAFNOSUPPORT — Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@...>
[#40571] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5529][Open] Bus error with Fibers on OSX Lion — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
[#40586] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5531][Open] deep_value for dealing with nested hashes — Kyle Peyton <kylepeyton@...>
[ruby-core:40383] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5482] Rubinius as basis for Ruby 2.0
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote: > More seriously, I agree that Ruby should be used whenever it makes sense > and I feel MRI uses too much C. I agree wholeheartedly. This is perhaps the biggest reason I want MRI to phase out the current C extension API in favor of one that's less invasive, and why I'm excited for any promising JIT work for MRI. If MRI can run Ruby fast enough, there will be less motivation to keep moving libraries into C. That will make my life (and Evan's life) a *whole* lot easier. > However, I still spend more time with MRI (than Rubinius) for the > following reasons: And those are also reasons I don't think MRI will go away any time soon. Suggestions to the contrary are just plain silly. MRI is the most compatible Ruby implementation. MRI is for many things still the fastest Ruby implementation (startup time, some POSIX situations, C extensions). MRI has the largest pool of regular contributors. MRI is a solid, known quantity. I will often recommend MRI when people need things that MRI does better than JRuby, like fast startup, low-level POSIX stuff, or features we can't support like callcc and fork. MRI is a vitally important part of the Ruby implementation world. Now, it would be nice if MRI didn't make changes to "Ruby the language" without some direct participation and buy-in from the other implementers, but that's a completely separate issue. > With better Ruby APIs (like String#byteslice in 1.9.3) and proposed > non-blocking IO methods[1], I think more parts of MRI could be > implemented in Ruby without significant performance loss. Agreed. And those APIs could easily translate to other implementations, giving us a much smaller implementation target to keep up with. Let's make it happen! - Charlie