[#6828] bug in mailread.rb, and: proposal for Mail#to_s — Wybo Dekker <wybo@...>
mailread separates mail messages looking for /^From /.
Hi,
[#6847] Re: Proposed patch for optparse to fix multi line argument handling — Daniel Hobe <hobe@...>
The attached patch fixes a bug in Optparse (at least I think it is a
Hi,
[#6864] ruby 1.8.4 rc breaks alias_method/rails in bad ways — "Ara.T.Howard" <ara.t.howard@...>
Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, [ISO-8859-15] Florian Growrote:
On Dec 12, 2005, at 1:19 PM, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Dec 12, 2005, at 1:42 PM, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
On Dec 12, 2005, at 2:10 PM, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
[#6888] Iconv library - differences between Ruby 1.8.2 and 1.8.4? — "Dave Burt" <dave@...>
Hi,
[#6891] Time.utc! and Time.localtime! — Daniel Hobe <hobe@...>
Writing a script yesterday I found out, much to my surprise, that the
On Dec 14, 2005, at 11:36 AM, Daniel Hobe wrote:
Hi,
[#6894] Dir.tmpdir RDoc — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Speaking of tmpdir, I'm curious why the tmpdir source
[#6906] Add Missing HTTP Headers and Status Codes to Ruby CGI — Paul Duncan <pabs@...>
Hi Everyone,
[#6911] IO.open not calling close in block form? — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
What happened to the block form of IO.open after 1.8.2? It's supposed to
[#6918] change to yaml in 1.8.4 — ara.t.howard@...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Jeremy Kemper wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 03:10 +0900, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
On Dec 16, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Tom Copeland wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-17 at 09:02 +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Dec 16, 2005, at 5:30 PM, Tom Copeland wrote:
[#6934] 1.8.x, YAML, and release management — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I'm concerned that 1.8.3's acceptance of non-backwards-compatible
Hi.
Ryan Davis (ryand-ruby@zenspider.com) wrote:
On Saturday 17 December 2005 22:18, Ryan Davis wrote:
Hi.
[#6964] Array Documentation Issues — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Let's start with:
[#6979] ruby 1.8.4 preview3 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hi,
[#6980] Re: ruby 1.8.4 preview3 — Kailden <kailden@...>
matz> I have just put 1.8.4 preview3 on the server.
[#6996] Problems building 1.8.4 with VS8 C++ Express Edition (cl 14.00) — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
Visual Studio C++ 2005 Express Edition (VS 8.0)
Hello,
On 26/12/05, U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp> wrote:
>>> __pioinfo structure may have been changed.
Hi.
I have replaced the config/makefile setup for Ruby using C++ Express, and I
Hi,
Hello,
Hi,
On 27/12/05, nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com> wrote:
Hello,
[#7008] Install fails to create directories — noreply@...
Bugs item #3115, was opened at 2005-12-28 05:00
Hi,
[#7028] Ruby 1.8.4 RDoc HTML Cleanups and HTML Language Support — Paul Duncan <pabs@...>
Hi,
Hi.
* H.Yamamoto (ocean@m2.ccsnet.ne.jp) wrote:
* H.Yamamoto (ocean@m2.ccsnet.ne.jp) wrote:
Re: 1.8.4 and respond_to
Hi, At Tue, 6 Dec 2005 23:14:25 +0900, Caleb Tennis wrote in [ruby-core:06853]: > It seems that since 1.8.3 the behavior of rb_respond_to is now defaulting to > not include private methods, which it did before. I understand the motive > here, as it will cause people to start using rb_obj_respond_to, which is more > like Object#respond_to?. However, this broke code in QtRuby and quite > possibly will break other extensions. How broken? > So, I guess what I'm asking is if there's a good reason for altering this > behavior between minor releases? It seems much more suited for breaking > between a larger release, in my humble opinion. The reason was: 1) it returned true even if a global method was matched, 2) it didn't conform to the default behavior of Object#respond_to?. -- Nobu Nakada