From: Eric Wong Date: 2017-01-03T18:29:23+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:78952] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13095] [PATCH] io.c (rb_f_syscall): remove deprecation notice kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com wrote: > >We should expect users of this to be able to read and follow > >documentation. We already have a warning about it. I prefer we > >allow it to improve, and allow users to shoot themselves in the > >foot if necessary. > > This is unrelated what I said. I said current interface (both C level and Ruby level) is not designed well and then, > user have _no way_ to write correct code. Ruby code have no way to care about memory alignment. I didn't only talk > about just careless user. We can support String#pack for those cases, I think (or add support). I haven't tried the incompatible functions/arch, yet. > >As I've said before: I don't want Ruby to be > >a nanny scripting language. > > I agree. But I don't think this patch is a right direction. > I'm curious. Why you don't like to make proper new C extension? > C program have a _way_ to treat syscall(2) interface correctly. C extensions require user to either have a compiler, or install a pre-built binary. Both have extra distribution and installation costs which are high for small (old i686) systems and users with limited bandwidth/storage. For those reasons, I prefer to use scripting as much as possible. Over the past year or so, I've been trying to avoid programming in any compiled languages. > >Anyways, I plan on having this release GVL for slow syscalls > >and maybe other small improvements. > > Wait. This? Which patch do you talk about? As far as I can see, current attached patch only remove a warning. Doesn't it? This patch to undeprecate, first. I have not implemented GVL release, yet; I will if I can get this undeprecated. Unsubscribe: