[#7872] Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...>

All, I needed a nonblocking socket connect for my asynchronous-event

18 messages 2006/05/14
[#7873] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/05/14

In article <3a94cf510605140559l7baa0205le341dac4f47d424b@mail.gmail.com>,

[#7874] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2006/05/15

How about introducing the method Socket#set_nonblocking, or alternatively

[#7875] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/05/15

Hi,

[#7876] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2006/05/15

Well, it's ok then. I'm comfortable adding in the nonblocking

[#7877] Re: Nonblocking socket-connect — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/05/15

Hi,

Re: [BUG] segfault on Proc#call after setting a trace_func

From: nobu@...
Date: 2006-05-19 15:56:16 UTC
List: ruby-core #7911
Hi,

At Sat, 6 May 2006 23:42:56 +0900,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote in [ruby-core:07835]:
> | Unfortunately the old block (ruby_frame->block) is never restored when
> | ruby leave proc_invoke()
> 
> That's it.  Thank you.  Here's the patch to fix this.

what state is this patch?

-- 
Nobu Nakada

In This Thread