[#41431] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694][Open] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account. — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>

27 messages 2011/12/01
[#41442] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account. — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...> 2011/12/01

[#41443] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account. — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...> 2011/12/01

Maybe we can add a new arity_range method that does this?

[#41496] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714][Open] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP — Heesob Park <phasis@...>

22 messages 2011/12/06

[#41511] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5719][Open] Hash::[] can't handle 100000+ args — Nick Quaranto <nick@...>

13 messages 2011/12/07

[#41557] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

14 messages 2011/12/08

[#41586] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5741][Open] Secure Erasure of Passwords — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>

17 messages 2011/12/10

[#41672] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5767][Open] Cache expanded_load_path to reduce startup time — Yura Sokolov <funny.falcon@...>

13 messages 2011/12/15

[#41681] Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc) — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

Since Ruby is built on top of simple concepts, most of the documentation

23 messages 2011/12/15
[#41683] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc) — Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...> 2011/12/15

[#41686] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc) — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...> 2011/12/16

Em 15-12-2011 19:23, Gary Wright escreveu:

[#41717] Feature : optional argument in File.join — Michel Demazure <michel@...>

In Windows, when using File.join, one often ends with a path containing

13 messages 2011/12/19
[#41719] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...> 2011/12/19

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Michel Demazure <michel@demazure.com> wrot=

[#41720] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join — Michel Demazure <michel@...> 2011/12/19

Luis Lavena wrote in post #1037331:

[#41728] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5781][Open] Query attributes (attribute methods ending in `?` mark) — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>

15 messages 2011/12/19

[#41799] Best way to separate implementation specific code? — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>

Hello,

15 messages 2011/12/24
[#41800] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code? — KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...> 2011/12/24

2011/12/24 Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com>:

[#41811] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code? — "U.Nakamura" <usa@...> 2011/12/26

Hello,

[#41817] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code? — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...> 2011/12/26

On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 10:51 PM, U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp> wrote:

[#41812] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5809][Open] Benchmark#bm: remove the label_width parameter — Benoit Daloze <redmine@...>

11 messages 2011/12/26

[ruby-core:41455] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5588] add negation flag (v) to Regexp

From: Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>
Date: 2011-12-02 21:22:45 UTC
List: ruby-core #41455
Issue #5588 has been updated by Suraj Kurapati.


Interesting.  Thanks for your feedback.  I will submit a new patch that only contains wholly negated regexps (/.../v) this weekend.  Cheers.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5588: add negation flag (v) to Regexp
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5588

Author: Suraj Kurapati
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yui NARUSE
Category: core
Target version: 2.0.0


Please add a negation flag (v) to regexps which inverts them:

  "ruby" =~ /perl/v       #=> true   (turn on negation)
  "ruby" !~ /perl/v       #=> false  (turn on negation)
  "ruby" =~ /(?v:perl)/   #=> true   (turn on negation)
  "ruby" !~ /(?v:perl)/   #=> false  (turn on negation)
  "ruby" =~ /(?-v:perl)/  #=> false  (turn off negation)
  "ruby" !~ /(?-v:perl)/  #=> true   (turn off negation)

The flag name "v" comes from the ex(1) command of the same name.

This has beneficial applications where it is sometimes difficult
to construct what you want to match but much easier to construct
what you *do not* want to match.  Having this negation built in
the regexp itself would remove the need for us to change our 
Ruby code to process a regexp in a different way.  

For example, suppose that you are passing a regexp to the `--name`
command-line option of MiniTest.  This regexp tells MiniTest to
only run those tests whose names match.  If Ruby had a negation
flag on its regexps, then it would be suddenly trivial to make
MiniTest skip certain tests by negating the regexp we pass in.

In this manner, we get a beneficial feature without ever changing
our Ruby code (the codebase of MiniTest in this example).  :-)

Thanks for your consideration.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

In This Thread