[#7809] uninit bug in yaml/emitter.c — "Pat Eyler" <rubypate@...>
During our hacking night, we also looked at an UNINIT bug in yaml/emitter.c
[#7813] :!~ not a symbol — noreply@...
Bugs item #4344, was opened at 2006-05-03 17:41
[#7818] (security-related) patch to ALLOC macros to prevent integer overflow bugs — "Dominique Brezinski" <dominique.brezinski@...>
While fixing the integer overflow in rb_ary_fill(), it occurred to me
[#7833] segfault on Proc#call after setting a trace_func — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
$ cat bug2.rb
[#7843] Possible YAMl bug in 1.8.4 — Damphyr <damphyr@...>
OK, while parsing the td2 data from the ruby-lang website we stumbled on
Its probably a bug. I'm not familiar with the specifics, but Ruby
[#7858] Ruby threads working with native threads — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...>
I recently wrote a network-event extension for Ruby ("eventmachine" in
[#7865] Strange interactions between Struct and 'pp' — noreply@...
Bugs item #4457, was opened at 2006-05-12 17:13
[#7872] Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...>
All, I needed a nonblocking socket connect for my asynchronous-event
In article <3a94cf510605140559l7baa0205le341dac4f47d424b@mail.gmail.com>,
How about introducing the method Socket#set_nonblocking, or alternatively
Hi,
Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in the nonblocking
Hi,
How about Socket#nbconnect and Socket#nbaccept?
On 5/15/06, Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <1147709691.180288.28647.nullmailer@x31.priv.netlab.jp>,
[#7881] Segfault on x86_64 when built with -O0 in CFLAGS — noreply@...
Bugs item #4491, was opened at 2006-05-16 12:46
[#7882] reproducible bug in DRb on OSX — cremes.devlist@...
I've been tearing my hair out the last few days trying to track down
[#7909] SCRIPT_LINES__ issue when loading a file more than once — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
SCRIPT_LINES__ is an obscure feature very few people care about, but I happen
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 06:46:05PM +0900, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
Hi,
[#7923] Nonblocking accept — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...>
Thanks to the Matz and colleagues for adding the *_nonblock functions. They
[#7928] set_trace_func: binding has wrong self value for return events — =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Florian_Gro=DF?= <florgro@...>
Moin.
Florian Growrote:
Re: Nonblocking socket-connect
Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in the nonblocking functions as an extension in my asynchronous-IO framework. If you decide it's best to leave nonblocking i/o out of the core, then people will be able to get it if necessary through my "eventmachine" library. On 5/15/06, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote: > Hi, > > In message "Re: Nonblocking socket-connect" > on Mon, 15 May 2006 20:20:12 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> writes: > > |In other words, if we call Socket#nonblocking(true), the behavior of > |Socket#connect would change to a pure nonblocking behavior. But it would not > |break any existing code, nor would it introduce of ugly new method names > |(connect_nonblocking, read_nonblocking, write_nonblocking). Calling > |Socket#nonblocking( false ) would revert to the original behavior. > > require 'io/nonblock' would do what you proposed. But I'm not > positive against making it built in, because non-blocking IO can cause > weird problems so easily under Ruby. I don't want to encourage using > them. Honestly, I want to remove io/nonblock if it's not too late. > > matz. > >