[#62297] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap. — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
nari@ruby-lang.org wrote:
7 messages
2014/05/02
[#62307] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap.
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/05/03
(2014/05/03 4:41), Eric Wong wrote:
[#62402] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap.
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/05/05
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#62523] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — ko1@...
Issue #9632 has been updated by Koichi Sasada.
3 messages
2014/05/11
[#62556] doxygen (Re: Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2014-05-11 8:50 GMT+09:00 Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>:
3 messages
2014/05/13
[#62727] [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
rb_unlink_method_entry may cause old_me to be swept before the new
7 messages
2014/05/24
[#63039] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/06/10
Hi,
[#63077] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/06/10
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#63086] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/06/11
(2014/06/11 4:47), Eric Wong wrote:
[#63087] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/06/11
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#62862] [RFC] README.EXT: document rb_gc_register_mark_object — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Any comment on officially supporting this as part of the C API?
5 messages
2014/05/30
[ruby-core:62498] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9071] Enumerable#slice_after
From:
akr@...
Date:
2014-05-10 11:35:16 UTC
List:
ruby-core #62498
Issue #9071 has been updated by Akira Tanaka.
File slice_after.patch added
Assignee set to Akira Tanaka
I impelemented Enumerable#slice_after.
I found two request for this feature:
This issue and
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22622156/how-to-implement-slice-after-or-group-certain-elements-with-certain-subsequent
I wrote the document with an example follows:
```
% ./ruby -e '
lines = ["foo\n", "bar\\\n", "baz\n", "\n", "qux\n"]
e = lines.slice_after(/(?<!\\)\n\z/)
p e.to_a
p e.map {|ll| ll[0...-1].map {|l| l.sub(/\\\n\z/, "") }.join + ll.last }'
[["foo\n"], ["bar\\\n", "baz\n"], ["\n"], ["qux\n"]]
["foo\n", "barbaz\n", "\n", "qux\n"]
```
This concatenates continuation lines.
More useful (catchy) examples may be helpful to persuade matz.
Any idea?
----------------------------------------
Feature #9071: Enumerable#slice_after
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9071#change-46659
* Author: Tsuyoshi Sawada
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Akira Tanaka
* Category:
* Target version:
----------------------------------------
I see in this discussion: http://ruby.11.x6.nabble.com/ruby-dev-38392-Enumerable-gather-each-td3534746.html that `Enumerable#slice_before` was named as such, having in mind the possibility of `Enumerable#slice_after` being implemented in the future. I feel the former convenient, but believe the latter should be as well, and am wondering why the latter was not implemented at the same time. I request it to be implemented.
---Files--------------------------------
slice_after.patch (7.01 KB)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/