[#61822] Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014 — Zachary Scott <e@...>
I would like to request developers meeting around April 17 or 18 in this month.
14 messages
2014/04/03
[#61825] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
2014/04/03
It's good if we have a meeting then.
[#61826] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Zachary Scott <e@...>
2014/04/03
Regarding openssl issues, I’ve discussed possible meeting time with Martin last month and he seemed positive.
[#61833] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Martin Bo煬et <martin.bosslet@...>
2014/04/03
Hi,
[#61847] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/04/03
Martin Boテ殕et <martin.bosslet@gmail.com> wrote:
[#61849] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Zachary Scott <e@...>
2014/04/04
I will post summary of meeting on Google docs after the meeting.
[#61852] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/04/04
Zachary Scott <e@zzak.io> wrote:
[#61860] Re: Plan Developers Meeting Japan April 2014
— Zachary Scott <e@...>
2014/04/04
I’m ok with redmine, thanks for bringing up your concern!
[#62076] Candidacy to 2.1 branch maintainer. — Tomoyuki Chikanaga <nagachika00@...>
Hello,
7 messages
2014/04/17
[#62078] Re: Candidacy to 2.1 branch maintainer.
— SHIBATA Hiroshi <shibata.hiroshi@...>
2014/04/17
> And does anyone have counter proposal for 2.1 maintenance?
[ruby-core:62118] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9761] [Open] TRY_WITH_GC with ruby_gc_stress
From:
s.wanabe@...
Date:
2014-04-21 15:23:38 UTC
List:
ruby-core #62118
Issue #9761 has been updated by _ wanabe. File xrealloc-with-gc_stress.patch added Status changed from Feedback to Open Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote: > Seems `objspace_malloc_increase()` already runs GC after `xmalloc` and `xcalloc` if `ruby_gc_stress` is set. > You may want it to run after `xrealloc` too? > Or to run full marking? Sorry for my poor code reading... It is enough to add a case of `xrealloc` for my concern, reproducing #9657. Anyone can close/reject this ticket if you think this is far from the original proposal. ---------------------------------------- Feature #9761: TRY_WITH_GC with ruby_gc_stress https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9761#change-46277 * Author: _ wanabe * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Category: core * Target version: ---------------------------------------- I hope `TRY_WITH_GC()` may use `ruby_gc_stress` value. Currently, `ruby_gc_stress` doesn't affect simple `xmalloc()`/`xrealloc()`/`xcalloc()`. It is usefull to make these functions under gc-stress. For example, #9657 is difficult to reproduce on trunk because there is not object creation but memory allocation after `BigDecimal_new()`. ---Files-------------------------------- try_with_gc-with-gc_stress.patch (691 Bytes) xrealloc-with-gc_stress.patch (456 Bytes) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/