[#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: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005?

From: "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
Date: 2006-07-21 15:43:50 UTC
List: ruby-core #8339
Hello,

In message "Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005?"
    on Jul.22,2006 00:13:40, <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
| Mmm. This may or may not be the case. This is why I have been trying
| to collect information for an ongoing conversation with Microsoft.
| They are ... concerned that we are still using VC6 as our compiler and
| want to see what can be helped to provide better support for moving
| Ruby to VC8.

We (maybe) already finished to be able to compile ruby with VC8.
About me, to compile all libraries with VC8 is *very* troublesome.
And to distribute VC8 binary, I must think how users get runtime
which matches with the manifest of my distribution (Yah, say good
bye to DLL hell, and say hello to manifest hell!)
It's the reason why I'm using VC6.

So... Microsoft should support not only us but also all authors
who write libraries.
If they maintain the binary compatibility, they might not have
had to use extra effort :)


Regards,
-- 
U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp>


In This Thread