[#70252] Re: [ruby-cvs:58640] nobu:r51492 (trunk): node.c: NODE_ALLOCA for ALLOCV — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Besides possible backwards compatibility, can we drop volatile
3 messages
2015/08/05
[#70257] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI — ko1@...
Issue #11420 has been reported by Koichi Sasada.
11 messages
2015/08/06
[#70337] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/11
Nice. Thank you guys for looking into this.
[#70349] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/12
Btw, did you consider using flexible array to avoid extra malloc
[#70355] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@...>
2015/08/12
I thought to suggest to embed hash_id_table directly into places when it is
[#70356] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2015/08/12
On 2015/08/13 4:29, Юрий Соколов wrote:
[#70358] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/12
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#70509] [Ruby trunk - Misc #11276] [RFC] compile.c: convert to use ccan/list — ko1@...
Issue #11276 has been updated by Koichi Sasada.
3 messages
2015/08/21
[#70639] the undefined behavior of an iterator if it is modified inside of the block to which it yields — Daniel Doubrovkine <dblock@...>
(this is my first time e-mailing list list, so apologies for any misstep :)
4 messages
2015/08/31
[ruby-core:70530] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11473] Immutable String literal in Ruby 3
From:
Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date:
2015-08-21 19:34:21 UTC
List:
ruby-core #70530
billk@cts.com wrote:
> Yusuke Endoh wrote:
> > Objection, unless a bailout is provided.
> >
> > `""` as a StringBuilder is acutally useful. `"".dup` is too tiring.
>
> Wow. Thanks for mentioning string building. It occurs to me I build
> strings like this somewhat regularly:
>
> sql = %{SELECT #{sec_id}, pt.path, st.doc_count }
> sql << %{FROM #{stats_tablename} AS st }
> sql << %{JOIN #{path_tablename} AS pt ON (st.path_id = pt.id) }
>
> So this will break in 3.0 ?
Yes, it seems so :<
Fwiw, I normally rely on '\' in the parser whenever possible to avoid
extra temporary strings + VM instructions:
sql = "SELECT #{sec_id}, pt.path, st.doc_count" \
" FROM #{stats_tablename} AS st" \
" JOIN #{path_tablename} AS pt ON (st.path_id = pt.id)"