[#68478] Looking for MRI projects for Ruby Google Summer of Code 2015 — Tony Arcieri <bascule@...>
Hi ruby-core,
10 messages
2015/03/10
[#68480] Re: Looking for MRI projects for Ruby Google Summer of Code 2015
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2015/03/10
I have.
[#68549] Re: Looking for MRI projects for Ruby Google Summer of Code 2015
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2015/03/17
I sent several ideas on previous, mail, but they are seems rejected?
[#68493] [Ruby trunk - Feature #10532] [PATCH] accept_nonblock supports "exception: false" — nobu@...
Issue #10532 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
5 messages
2015/03/11
[#68503] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #10532] [PATCH] accept_nonblock supports "exception: false"
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/03/12
Committed as r49948.
[#68504] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #10532] [PATCH] accept_nonblock supports "exception: false"
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2015/03/12
On 2015/03/12 12:08, Eric Wong wrote:
[#68506] Seven stacks (and two questions) — Jakub Trzebiatowski <jaktrze1@...>
The Ruby Hacking Guide says that Ruby has窶ヲ seven stacks. Is it an implementation choice (and it could be implemented with one stack), or is there really a need for seven logical stacks? For example, Lua has one stack, and still closures with upvalues are totally possible (it窶冱 like Ruby窶冱 blocks that can reference local variables of their enclosing method, but it works for any function with any upvalues).
5 messages
2015/03/12
[#68520] Possible regression in 2.1 and 2.2 in binding when combined with delegate? — Joe Swatosh <joe.swatosh@...>
# The following code
3 messages
2015/03/14
[#68604] GSOC project Cross-thread Fiber support — surya pratap singh raghuvanshi <oshosurya@...>
- *hi i am a third year computer science student interested in working
6 messages
2015/03/22
[#68606] Re: GSOC project Cross-thread Fiber support
— Tony Arcieri <bascule@...>
2015/03/22
Hi Surya,
[#68619] Re: GSOC project Cross-thread Fiber support
— surya pratap singh raghuvanshi <oshosurya@...>
2015/03/23
hi tony,
[ruby-core:68360] [Ruby trunk - Bug #10908] [Rejected] Addrinfo.new appears to ignore the afamily argument when using a String for sockaddr
From:
akr@...
Date:
2015-03-01 00:37:21 UTC
List:
ruby-core #68360
Issue #10908 has been updated by Akira Tanaka.
Status changed from Open to Rejected
afamily returns the family in sockaddr.
2nd argument for Addrinfo.new doesn't affect afamily.
pfamily (and 2nd argument for Addrinfo.new) corresponds to ai_family field of struct addrinfo and will be used for 1st argument of socket().
afamily (and first 1 or 2 bytes in 1st argument for Addrinfo.new) corresponds to sa_family field of struct sockaddr and will be used for bind() or connect().
----------------------------------------
Bug #10908: Addrinfo.new appears to ignore the afamily argument when using a String for sockaddr
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10908#change-51705
* Author: Yorick Peterse
* Status: Rejected
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* ruby -v: ruby 2.2.0p0 (2014-12-25 revision 49005) [x86_64-linux]
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
When creating a new `Addrinfo` instance the `new` class method appears to ignore
the 2nd (afamily) argument and always sets it to `AF_INET`. Some examples:
Socket::AF_INET # => 2
Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost')).afamily # => 2
Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost'), Socket::AF_INET6).afamily # => 2
Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost'), Socket::PF_UNSPEC).afamily # => 2
Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost'), Socket::AF_IPX).afamily # => 2
Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost'), Socket::AF_LOCAL).afamily # => 2
Is this correct, or is this a bug?
The documentation states the following about this argument:
> family is specified as an integer to specify the protocol family such as
> Socket::PF_INET. It can be a symbol or a string which is the constant name
> with or without PF_ prefix such as :INET, :INET6, :UNIX, "PF_INET", etc. If
> omitted, PF_UNSPEC is assumed.
I looked at the tests but couldn't find any specific examples of this behaviour.
For Rubinius I ended up writing the following Rubyspec which currently passes on
both Rubinius (you'll need the Git master branch for this, for now) and Ruby
2.2: <http://git.io/AhpQ>. I've attached the spec as well in case the URL stops
working.
---Files--------------------------------
initialize_spec.rb (3.68 KB)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/