[#82311] [Ruby trunk Bug#13794] Infinite loop of sched_yield — charlie@...
Issue #13794 has been reported by catphish (Charlie Smurthwaite).
4 messages
2017/08/09
[#82518] [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — mame@...
Issue #13618 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh).
5 messages
2017/08/30
[#82552] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/08/31
mame@ruby-lang.org wrote:
[#82756] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
— Eric Wrong <normalperson@...>
2017/09/12
Eric Wrong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:
[ruby-core:82481] [Ruby trunk Misc#13840] Collection methods - stability
From:
Greg.mpls@...
Date:
2017-08-27 14:27:40 UTC
List:
ruby-core #82481
Issue #13840 has been reported by MSP-Greg (Greg L). ---------------------------------------- Misc #13840: Collection methods - stability https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13840 * Author: MSP-Greg (Greg L) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- I'm trying to fix some method code (`Gem::Resolver#search_for`) in rubygems. Regardless, in simplifying the code, I was left with one question regarding all of the sort/filter group methods in ruby. Which ones are considered stable, or, is original order maintained where applicable? Obviously, this pertains to `sort` and `sort_by`, but also has meaning in `group_by`, `select`, `reject`, and similar methods. I'm not proposing one or another, although I'd prefer stable. Docs for all these methods should note this, and if stability is guaranteed, tests should verify it. Happy to help. As an aside, `Gem::Resolver#search_for` exists in both [ruby](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/21e4ade56b4261c549fd03f96f4430946d028bea/lib/rubygems/resolver.rb#L225-L235) and [rubygems](https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/d5de035229fc5745e17cfa56b3f3ebe30f537468/lib/rubygems/resolver.rb#L225-L256), but is different. Also, a test for it exists in rubygems, but not in ruby. Seems odd. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>