[#44036] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6242][Open] Ruby should support lists — "shugo (Shugo Maeda)" <redmine@...>
[#44084] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6246][Open] 1.9.3-p125 intermittent segfault — "jshow (Jodi Showers)" <jodi@...>
[#44156] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265][Open] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax — "rosenfeld (Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas)" <rr.rosas@...>
Hi,
(2012/04/09 14:19), Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#44163] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6266][Open] encoding related exception with recent integrated psych — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>
[#44233] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6274][Open] Float addition incorrect — "swanboy (Michael Swan)" <swanyboy4@...>
[#44303] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6284][Open] Add composition for procs — "pabloh (Pablo Herrero)" <pablodherrero@...>
[#44329] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6287][Open] nested method should only be visible by nesting/enclosing method — "botp (bot pena)" <botpena@...>
[#44349] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Open] new queue / blocking queues — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 10:58:12AM +0900, mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 06:25:59PM +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:
[#44372] Possible merge error of code in Issue 4651 on to Ruby 1.9.3-p125? — "Blythe,Aaron" <ABLYTHE@...>
tl;dr I believe I have uncovered a merge error to ruby 1.9.3-p125 from Issue 4651. Please advise if this is the same issue, or if a separate issue needs to be logged. Details below.
[#44431] [Backport93 - Backport #6314][Open] Backport r35374 and r35375 — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <drbrain@...7.net>
[#44432] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6315][Open] handler to trace output of each line of code executed — "ankopainting (Anko Painting)" <anko.com+ruby@...>
[#44533] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341][Open] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join — "rudolf (r stu3)" <redmine@...>
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
Hello,
(4/24/12 6:55 AM), Yusuke Endoh wrote:
> kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI) wrote:
[#44540] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6343][Open] Improved Fiber documentation — "andhapp (Anuj Dutta)" <anuj@...>
[#44612] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6354][Open] Remove escape (break/return/redo/next support) from class/module scope — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>
[#44630] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361][Open] Bitwise string operations — "MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)" <Martin.Bosslet@...>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:53 PM, MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)
On Saturday, April 28, 2012 at 8:52 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[#44636] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6364][Open] Segmentation fault happend when running test_cptr.rb — "raylinn@... (ray linn)" <raylinn@...>
[#44667] possible YAML bug in ruby 1.9.3p125? — Young Hyun <youngh@...>
YAML in ruby 1.9.3p125 seems to have a bug reading in YAML from older Ruby versions. Specifically, YAML in 1.9.3p125 mis-parses text like "123_456" as a number (just as in Ruby) rather than as a string, which appears to be the correct behavior according to the YAML specification.
[#44686] [BUG] not a node 0x07 — ronald braswell <rpbraswell@...>
Running ruby 1.8.6 on Solaris 10.
2012/4/28 ronald braswell <rpbraswell@gmail.com>:
I have heard reports of this on 1.9.x. Do you know if this problem has
[#44704] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6373][Open] public #self — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>
Issue #6373 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune.
[#44743] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6375][Open] Python notation for literal Hash — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>
[#44748] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6376][Open] Feature lookup and checking if feature is loaded — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 6:02 AM, mame (Yusuke Endoh) <mame@tsg.ne.jp> wrote:
[ruby-core:44379] Re: Possible merge error of code in Issue 4651 on to Ruby 1.9.3-p125?
I should comment in little more detail.. 2012/4/16 NARUSE, Yui <naruse@airemix.jp>: > 2012/4/16 Blythe,Aaron <ABLYTHE@cerner.com>: >> tl;dr I believe I have uncovered a merge error to ruby 1.9.3-p125 from Issue >> 4651. lease advise if this is the same issue, or if a separate issue needs >> to be logged. Details below. >> >> While running tests in a rather simple Rails application, our development >> team has been seeing errors similar to: >> *ttps://github.com/lsegal/yard/issues/494 >> *ttps://github.com/lsegal/yard/issues/382 >> >> Which point to: >> http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4651 Those YARD issue is from clang/llvm + continuation (callcc). It is fixed in r34278. Ruby 1.9.3-p125 includes r34278. Ruby 1.9.2 hasn't include yet, and I don't i will do or not. People should migrate to 1.9.3-p125. >> We have observed this on both: >> *HEL 6.2, ruby-1.9.3-p125, Rails 3.2.3. >> *SX Lion, Ruby 1.9.3-p125, Rails 3.2.3, XCode 4.2.1 > > Those report is not complete because a clean ruby environment don't have yard. > >> The detailed report is similar to the Yard issues noted above. can >> provide the entire output, however I think the interesting part is the C >> level backtrace provided here: >> >> -- C level backtrace information >> ------------------------------------------- >> >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x17a977) >> [0x7f8dc1bcd977] vm_dump.c:796 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x5e824) >> [0x7f8dc1ab1824] error.c:258 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(rb_bug+0xb8) >> [0x7f8dc1ab19c8] error.c:277 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x10afd5) >> [0x7f8dc1b5dfd5] signal.c:609 >> /lib64/libpthread.so.0() [0x31de60f4a0] >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(rb_gc_mark+0x39) >> [0x7f8dc1aca7e9] gc.c:1635 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x163615) >> [0x7f8dc1bb6615] vm.c:251 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x76b7c) >> [0x7f8dc1ac9b7c] gc.c:1861 >> /home/semantic/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.3-p125/lib/libruby.so.1.9(+0x16366c) >> [0x7f8dc1bb666c] vm.c:1719 >> >> Which seems to point to the Garbage collector marking operation. hich is >> where this might be either a slightly different cause or a slightly >> different manifestation of the same cause. s you can see we are using rvm. >> owever I don't think that has anything to do with this issue (as noted in >> the conversation on Issue 4651). The backtrace seems different issue from #4651. -- NARUSE, Yui naruse@airemix.jp>