[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Re: [PATCH] Some rdoc for mkmf

From: nobu@...
Date: 2006-07-09 10:10:46 UTC
List: ruby-core #8179
Hi,

At Sun, 9 Jul 2006 03:11:44 +0900,
Daniel Berger wrote in [ruby-core:08177]:
> Attached is an rdoc patch for what I believe are the
> most used methods of mkmf.  They include docs for:

Thank you for the great job.

> check_sizeof

I guess checking exact size of a type is less necessary in
common.  Checking trueness of an expression might be enough in
most cases, I guess.

E.g.:

  def check_iftrue(expr, headers = nil, &b)
    checking_for("if #{expr}") do
      try_static_assert(expr, headers, &b)
    end
  end

  check_iftrue("sizeof(long) == sizeof(void*)")

than:

  check_sizeof("void*") == check_sizeof("long")

> check_sizeof
> have_library
> have_struct_member
> have_type

And these 4 methods accepts a name or a list for headers.

> Also, I was wondering if we could get the have_const
> method added in, as per Nobu's patch in
> ruby-core:4426.

It worked for integral constants only.  Now I guess have_macro
and have_var would do the role instead.  Any idea?

-- 
Nobu Nakada

In This Thread