[#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> wrote:

[#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:41709] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)

From: Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...>
Date: 2011-12-18 01:20:22 UTC
List: ruby-core #41709
On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:15 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:

> Great! I didn't know about this. But the information about return doesn't seem to be accurate:
> 
> "Inside a code block, the behavior of return depends on whether or not the block constitutes the body of a regular Proc object or a lambda-style Proc object. In the case of a lambda, return causes execution of the block to terminate. In the case of a regular Proc, return attempts to return from the enclosing method. If there is no enclosing method, it痴 an error."
> 
> What is the meaning of "enclosing" in this context?
> 
> def method_name(proc_argument)
>     proc_argument[] # contains a return
> end
> 
> My understanding is that the enclosing method of the proc call is "method_name".

No.  Enclosing means the method that lexically encloses the block (and thus the 'return') where it appears in the source.

> Even if you say the the definition for "enclosing method" is the one that defined the proc, it still exists, so the snippet "If there is no enclosing method, it's an error." also doesn't reflect the situation.

There are several cases where there might not be a lexically enclosing method:
- a proc defined at the top level
- a proc defined within a module or class block but not within a method definition

Basically you shouldn't be creating procs in these places but lambdas instead.

It is also possible that there is no occurrence of the method on the call stack when the
block is called and the return executed.  That is to say that  the enclosing method
has already returned when the block is called.

> The definition of return for procs should be clearer IMO in the docs above, don't you agree?

Yep, the documentation could be clearer.

Gary Wright

In This Thread