[#4065] Surprise in Time#sec — Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@...>
This bit me:
[#4067] Segfault in Thread#initialize / caller — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
[#4076] Ruby/DL — Jamis Buck <jamis_buck@...>
I recently used Ruby/DL to create bindings to the SQLite3 embedded
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:53:49AM +0900, Jamis Buck wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 03:05:48AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 01:10:34AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 06:57:57PM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:06:16AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
ts wrote:
[#4116] Test::Unit::Collector::Dir won't work with code that modifies $LOAD_PATH — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Any test code that depends upon modifications of $: fails when used
Hi,
On 11 Jan 2005, at 04:14, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On 11 Jan 2005, at 09:39, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:06:10 +0900, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:48:58 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:17:14 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
[#4146] The face of Unicode support in the future — Charles O Nutter <headius@...>
Hello Rubyists!
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:53:48PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:13:35PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4189] Authenticated proxy support for open-uri — Neil Kohl <nakohl@...>
Hello!
[#4232] Carriage return on shebang — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4242] tracer.rb: Do not list pseudo source lines of binary extensions — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4243] Patch that enables https in open-uri.rb — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Hi,
In article <41E93F42.9090705@ntecs.de>,
Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4269] Re: The face of Unicode support in the future — Wes Nakamura <wknaka@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4296] parse_c.rb: allow whitespace after function names — Tilman Sauerbeck <tilman@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> [2005-01-21 17:43]:
[#4311] RFE: Enumerable#group_by, Array#^ — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4323] test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception in a test method, as follows.
In article <87is5jb46q.fsf@serein.a02.aist.go.jp>,
On 9/1/06, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
On Sep 2, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
In article <A604C0B3-95ED-4B9B-866C-79A2C7D5E3C4@segment7.net>,
On Sep 2, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <622DAC7E-55DB-4854-B82B-A037CE9C75EF@segment7.net>,
In article <87ac5hv4bo.fsf@fsij.org>,
On Sep 3, 2006, at 8:21 AM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4332] IO#clearerr missing in action — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
I wanted to implement tail(1) in ruby cleanly, but found the best I
[#4335] When will Object#type disappear? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
Re: The face of Unicode support in the future
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 12:03:36AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote: > Hi, > > In message "Re: The face of Unicode support in the future" > on Thu, 13 Jan 2005 23:42:55 +0900, Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > |> Yes, and the comparison is always false unless > |> > |> * encodings of the two strings are both ASCII compatible > |> * they have same (7 bits) ASCII character sequence > | > |This feels wrong to me. My hunch tells me it often will work > |right in test situations, and then fall down in edge cases > |during production. I'd be much happier with something that > |just failed directly (ie, the strings would always be different) > |than something that often-but-not-always returns the right > |value. > > It was so in my first prototype, but the compatibility between plain > ASCII and UTF-8 (and other Japanese encodings) is used so often, so > widely, above condition was preferred. Can you imagine any edge case? Yes. I'll use one that has bit me in other directions: Input comes from a database and a web form. The subsystems provide strings with different encoding. During tests, programmers use english for testing (most programmers I know prefer using english for all code development including tests, even if their native language is norwegian/german/etc). The tests work correctly. When the system is set in production, things start to fall apart. I've been bitten by the encoding issue between Integer and String due to the combination of a database and a text file. This was slightly icky. I find it likely that having the comparison work 99% of the time and fail the rest would cause much more pain. I'd almost wish comparison of strings with different encoding to raise an exception, but it would be in conflict with the way other comparisons work, and I'm not sure which behaviour (exception vs always returning false) would be most useful for strings anyway. Eivind.