[#7271] Re: [PATCH] solaris 10 isinf and ruby_setenv fixes — ville.mattila@...
2 messages
2006/02/01
[#7272] [PATCH] OS X core dumps when $0 is changed and then loads shared libraries — noreply@...
Bugs item #3399, was opened at 2006-01-31 22:25
3 messages
2006/02/01
[#7274] Re: [PATCH] solaris 10 isinf and ruby_setenv fixes — ville.mattila@...
3 messages
2006/02/01
[#7277] Re: [PATCH] solaris 10 isinf and ruby_setenv fixes — ville.mattila@...
4 messages
2006/02/01
[#7280] Re: [PATCH] solaris 10 isinf and ruby_setenv fixes — ville.mattila@...
2 messages
2006/02/01
[#7286] Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273 — ara.t.howard@...
On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Minero Aoki wrote:
23 messages
2006/02/02
[#7292] ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/02/02
[#7293] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/02/02
mathew wrote:
[#7298] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— James Britt <ruby@...>
2006/02/03
mathew wrote:
[#7310] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— Evan Webb <evanwebb@...>
2006/02/07
I'm not sure we even need the 'with' syntax. Even if we do, it breaks
[#7311] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...>
2006/02/07
On 2006.02.07 10:03, Evan Webb wrote:
[#7313] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— Evan Webb <evanwebb@...>
2006/02/07
Umm, on what version are you seeing a warning there? I don't and never
[#7315] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...>
2006/02/07
On 2006.02.07 14:47, Evan Webb wrote:
[#7316] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— Evan Webb <evanwebb@...>
2006/02/07
I'd by far prefer it never emit a warning. The warning is assumes you
[#7318] ruby --quiet; was Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— ara.t.howard@...
2006/02/07
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Evan Webb wrote:
[#7321] Re: [RCR] ruby --quiet; was Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— "Timothy J. Wood" <tjw@...>
2006/02/07
[#7322] Re: [RCR] ruby --quiet; was Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273)
— ara.t.howard@...
2006/02/07
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Timothy J. Wood wrote:
[#7305] Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3 — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 08:33:40PM +0900, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
28 messages
2006/02/05
[#7401] Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2006/02/22
On Feb 5, 2006, at 5:05 AM, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
[#7414] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
2006/02/23
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 02:21:24PM +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:
[#7427] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/02/26
Hi,
[#7429] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
2006/02/26
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:45:28AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#7430] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
2006/02/26
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 06:06:17PM +0100, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
[#7432] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/02/27
In article <20060226171117.GB29508@tux-chan>,
[#7428] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/02/26
In article <1140968746.321377.18843.nullmailer@x31.priv.netlab.jp>,
[#7444] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— nobu@...
2006/02/28
Hi,
[#7445] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/02/28
In article <m1FDshr-0006MNC@Knoppix>,
[#7447] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/02/28
In article <87irr047sx.fsf@m17n.org>,
[#7448] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/02/28
In article <87vev0hxu5.fsf@m17n.org>,
[#7465] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— "Evan Webb" <evanwebb@...>
2006/03/01
Just my quick 2 cents...
[#7468] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/03/01
In article <92f5f81d0602281855g27e78f4eua8bf20e0b8e47b68@mail.gmail.com>,
[#7469] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— nobu@...
2006/03/01
Hi,
[#7471] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/03/02
In article <m1FESAD-0001blC@Knoppix>,
[#7473] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3)
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/03/02
Hi,
[#7331] Set containing duplicates — noreply@...
Bugs item #3506, was opened at 2006-02-08 22:52
5 messages
2006/02/08
[#7337] Parse error within Regexp — Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Hi,
8 messages
2006/02/11
[#7338] Re: Parse error within Regexp
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/02/11
Hi,
[#7340] Re: Parse error within Regexp
— Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
2006/02/11
On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 01:34:55AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#7344] Ruby 1.8.4 on Mac OS X 10.4 Intel — Dae San Hwang <daesan@...>
Hi, all. This is my first time posting to this mailing list.
5 messages
2006/02/12
[#7348] Socket.getaddrinfo & Bonjour (Was: Re: Ruby 1.8.4 on Mac OS X 10.4 Intel)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2006/02/13
On Feb 12, 2006, at 6:14 AM, Dae San Hwang wrote:
[#7347] Latest change to eval.c — Kent Sibilev <ksruby@...>
It seems that the latest change to eval.c (1.616.2.154) has broken irb.
9 messages
2006/02/12
[#7349] Re: Latest change to eval.c
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/02/13
Hi,
[#7354] Re: Latest change to eval.c
— Kent Sibilev <ksruby@...>
2006/02/13
Thanks, Matz.
[#7364] Method object used as Object#instance_eval block doesn't work (as expected) — noreply@...
Bugs item #3565, was opened at 2006-02-15 02:32
8 messages
2006/02/15
[#7365] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-3565 ] Method object used as Object#instance_eval block doesn't work (as expected)
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/02/15
Hi,
[#7371] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-3565 ] Method object used as Object#instance_eval block doesn't work (as expected)
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2006/02/15
[#7374] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-3565 ] Method object used as Object#instance_eval block doesn't work (as expected)
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2006/02/15
Hi,
[#7375] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-3565 ] Method object used as Object#instance_eval block doesn't work (as expected)
— Ozgur Murat Homurlu <ozgurmurath@...>
2006/02/15
On Pr 2006-02-16 at 03:18 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#7376] Minor tracer.rb patch — Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi,
6 messages
2006/02/15
[#7396] IO#reopen — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
5 messages
2006/02/20
[#7403] Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9 — Emiel van de Laar <emiel@...>
Hi List,
12 messages
2006/02/22
[#7404] Re: Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9
— George Ogata <g_ogata@...>
2006/02/22
Emiel van de Laar <emiel@rednode.nl> writes:
[#7406] Re: Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9
— dblack@...
2006/02/22
Hi --
[#7439] FYI: ruby-lang.org is on spamcop blacklists — mathew <meta@...>
dnsbl/bl.spamcop.net returned deny: for
3 messages
2006/02/27
[#7442] GC Question — zdennis <zdennis@...>
I have been posting to the ruby-talk mailing list about ruby memory and GC, and I think it's ready
17 messages
2006/02/27
[#7446] Re: GC Question
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2006/02/28
Hello.
[#7449] Re: GC Question
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2006/02/28
Hello.
Re: GC Question
From:
"H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
Date:
2006-02-28 12:06:08 UTC
List:
ruby-core #7454
> Well, here the example given with 1.6.8
>
>
>moulon% ./ruby -v b.rb
>ruby 1.6.8 (2002-12-24) [i686-linux]
>178
>check now
>975698
>148
>149
>149
>149
>b.rb:24:in `join': Interrupt
> from b.rb:24
>moulon%
>
> and with 1.8.4
>
>moulon% /usr/bin/ruby -v b.rb
>ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i486-linux]
>187
>check now
>853644
>800159
>800160
>800161
>800162
>b.rb:24:in `join': Interrupt
> from b.rb:24
>moulon%
Hmm, on my machine,
E:\ruby-cvs\win32_1_6>miniruby -v \b.rb
ruby 1.6.8 (2002-12-24) [i586-mswin32]
68
check now
975362
70
71
72
73
73
\b.rb:23:in `join': Interrupt
from \b.rb:23
E:\ruby-cvs\win32_1_8>miniruby -v \b.rb
ruby 1.8.4 (2006-02-24) [i386-mswin32]
108
check now
853455
110
111
112
/b.rb:23:in `join': Interrupt
from /b.rb:23
Interesting but probably conservative GC is always like this.