[#61171] Re: [ruby-changes:33145] normal:r45224 (trunk): gc.c: fix build for testing w/o RGenGC — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
(2014/03/01 16:15), normal wrote:
[#61243] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9425] [PATCH] st: use power-of-two sizes to avoid slow modulo ops — normalperson@...
Issue #9425 has been updated by Eric Wong.
[#61359] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs — normalperson@...
Issue #9609 has been reported by Eric Wong.
(2014/03/07 19:09), normalperson@yhbt.net wrote:
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61424] [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I'm unsure about this. I _hate_ the extra branches this adds;
Hi Eric,
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
(2014/03/14 2:12), Eric Wong wrote:
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61452] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [Open] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been reported by Eric Wong.
[#61496] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9638] [Open] [PATCH] limit IDs to 32-bits on 64-bit systems — normalperson@...
Issue #9638 has been reported by Eric Wong.
[#61568] hash function for global method cache — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I came upon this because I noticed existing st numtable worked poorly
(2014/03/18 8:03), Eric Wong wrote:
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
what's the profit from using binary tree in place of hash?
Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@gmail.com> wrote:
[#61687] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9606] Ocassional SIGSEGV inTestException#test_machine_stackoverflow on OpenBSD — normalperson@...
Issue #9606 has been updated by Eric Wong.
[#61760] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been updated by Eric Wong.
[ruby-core:61667] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9669] Inconsistent SyntaxError in Ruby 2.1 mandatory keyword arguments definition without parentheses.
Issue #9669 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada. Or put a semicolon after `b:`. Matthew Kerwin wrote: > I think Ruby should drop the line continuation, and interpret all three code samples like the second case above, even though it might be hard to solve with the current parser. Do you mean *all* line continuations? ---------------------------------------- Bug #9669: Inconsistent SyntaxError in Ruby 2.1 mandatory keyword arguments definition without parentheses. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9669#change-45922 * Author: Teja Sophista * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Category: * Target version: * ruby -v: 2.1.1 * Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Ruby allowed us to define method with arguments without parentheses. ~~~ def foo a:, b: 'bar' end #=> :foo def foo a:, b: puts 'bar' end #=> syntax error ~~~ -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/