[#72745] [Ruby trunk - Misc #11876] [Closed] Scheduled maintenance 2016/01/01 — shibata.hiroshi@...
Issue #11876 has been updated by Hiroshi SHIBATA.
shibata.hiroshi@gmail.com wrote:
[#72824] [Ruby trunk - Bug #11973] IO#advise should raise NotImplementedError on platforms that do not support that call — git@...
Issue #11973 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
[#72954] [Ruby trunk - Feature #12010] [Assigned] Exclude dot and dotdot from Dir#each — naruse@...
Issue #12010 has been reported by Yui NARUSE.
naruse@airemix.jp wrote:
[#73313] [Ruby trunk - Bug #12007] [Open] Newly added Unicode data file doesn't get downloaded — shugo@...
SXNzdWUgIzEyMDA3IGhhcyBiZWVuIHVwZGF0ZWQgYnkgU2h1Z28gTWFlZGEuCgpTdGF0dXMgY2hh
[#73372] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — benton@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Benton Barnett.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 5:13 PM, <benton@bentonbarnett.com> wrote:
[#73421] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — nekocat432@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Ruby Dino.
I=E2=80=99m sorry, but this, like the code of merit, is merely a derailing =
T24gMjAxNi8wMS8yNiAwMTozMiwgQXVzdGluIFppZWdsZXIgd3JvdGU6Cj4gSeKAmW0gc29ycnks
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Martin J. D=C3=BCrst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac=
[#73491] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — git@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
They will never provide any numbers because they are not engineers and they
Coraline is a panelist on Ruby rogues and a very well respected member of
OK, sorry for previous comment. Let's try this way.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Andrew Kirilenko <
[#73558] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — andrew.kirilenko@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Andrew Kirilenko.
Andrew, please stop digging. Your hole is only getting deeper.
>Andrew, please stop digging. Your hole is only getting deeper.
[#73586] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — andrew@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Andrew Vit.
[#73593] [Ruby trunk - Bug #12034] RegExp does not respect file encoding directive — nobu@...
Issue #12034 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
[ruby-core:72921] [Ruby trunk - Bug #12002] [Rejected] **param notation seems to be creating a new hash in ruby 2.2.0
Issue #12002 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
Description updated
Status changed from Open to Rejected
It is not a bug.
As `*rest`, modifying `o` should not affect the object in the caller scope.
----------------------------------------
Bug #12002: **param notation seems to be creating a new hash in ruby 2.2.0
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12002#change-56151
* Author: Tiago Cardoso
* Status: Rejected
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* ruby -v:
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
I found the regression regarding the handling of the `**` notation for options hash in a method. In ruby 2.1 and lower, it seems to always be handled in the same way, i.e. it is always the same object:
```ruby
def hashie1(o={})
puts o.object_id
end
def hashie2(**o)
puts o.object_id
end
v={}
puts v.object_id
hashie1(v)
hashie2(v)
# 2.0.0
69830362391800
69830362391800
69830362391800
# 2.1.6
69884363736320
69884363736320
69884363736320
# 2.2.4
69922787909840
69922787909840
69922787909700
# 2.3.0
69915134419200
69915134419200
69915134419000
```
I didn't find any documentation regarding this change. Is it supposed to work the way it works in 2.2 and 2.3? Because my understanding was that `**` was supposed to be the new notation and should just work as the previous notation.
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>