[#78949] [Ruby trunk Feature#13095] [PATCH] io.c (rb_f_syscall): remove deprecation notice — kosaki.motohiro@...
Issue #13095 has been updated by Motohiro KOSAKI.
3 messages
2017/01/03
[#78997] [Ruby trunk Bug#13110] Byte-based operations for String — shugo@...
Issue #13110 has been updated by Shugo Maeda.
3 messages
2017/01/06
[#79228] Re: [ruby-cvs:64576] naruse:r57410 (trunk): Prevent GC by volatile [Bug #13150] — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
naruse@ruby-lang.org wrote:
5 messages
2017/01/23
[#79511] Re: [ruby-cvs:64576] naruse:r57410 (trunk): Prevent GC by volatile [Bug #13150]
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/02/13
Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:
[#79518] Re: [ruby-cvs:64576] naruse:r57410 (trunk): Prevent GC by volatile [Bug #13150]
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2017/02/13
On 2017/02/13 10:04, Eric Wong wrote:
[#79298] [Ruby trunk Bug#13085][Assigned] io.c io_fwrite creates garbage — nobu@...
Issue #13085 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
3 messages
2017/01/29
[#79337] Re: [ruby-changes:45397] normal:r57469 (trunk): io.c: recycle garbage on write — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Eric:
4 messages
2017/01/31
[#79352] Re: [ruby-changes:45397] normal:r57469 (trunk): io.c: recycle garbage on write
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/01/31
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[ruby-core:78963] Re: ruby/spec needs help from CRuby committers
From:
Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
Date:
2017-01-04 01:52:51 UTC
List:
ruby-core #78963
I did ask attendees of last developer meeting to join this thread. Nobody seems to do their homework so I would like to do my own. Please note that anything below is my private opinion. Never take them as canon, or any consensus. ---- I once was a SET (Software Engineer in Test) at a company of 1,000+ employee. My role there included writing tests of someone else's products, much like the situation of rubyspec. Why that company had dedicated test-automation engineers was because writing non-garbage acceptance tests in general requires a different skill set from writing a production code. Of course, people wrote their own unit tests and that's definitely a good thing. But they did so to _boost_ their development, not to be conservative about their specifications. So when it comes to ruby. I don't think test/ruby is the ideal solution for everyone. I also admit it's ugly, and needs improvements. But at least I can say it's a wrong idea to abondon it. Doing so is much like to throw away unit tests and let Selenium do everything. Just nonsense. Unit test is not a spec. They exist separately because they have different purposes. Merging them hurts both sides. The (failed) past attempts to migrate rubyspec had problems on this point, seems to me at least. That said. I also have to note that tests without specs is a poor solution. The problems pointed by @eregon in this thread is worth listening to. The company I worked before solved this problem by hiring someone to write specs. That's not doable by us (no such budget) but someone has to do that job somehow. Are we going to let the core devs do that? Then I think we need to motivate them. "Spec is a good thing you should do" is a true assertion but sounds much like a homily. Instead show them it benefits. For instance, find bugs using spec and show them how it helps their developments. Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>