[#84867] [Ruby trunk Bug#14357] thread_safe tests suite segfaults — v.ondruch@...

Issue #14357 has been reported by vo.x (Vit Ondruch).

11 messages 2018/01/15

[#84980] [Ruby trunk Feature#13618][Assigned] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — hsbt@...

Issue #13618 has been updated by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA).

10 messages 2018/01/23
[#85012] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618][Assigned] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2018/01/23

hsbt@ruby-lang.org wrote:

[ruby-core:85011] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#14385] Deprecate back-tick for Ruby 3.

From: Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date: 2018-01-23 17:10:42 UTC
List: ruby-core #85011
nobu@ruby-lang.org wrote:
> Matz's intention is to use back-ticks for a different syntax,
> not to deprecate the command substitution feature.

I think that is dangerous to have the meaning of any syntax element
become something else, even removing it entirely would be less bad.

I have some scripts which are not used for several years at a
time, so they may never be run during the 2.x cycle.  Having
back-tick do something entirely different in 3.x can give a
false positive on success, that potentially causes data loss or
corruption.

False positives is worse than complete failure of a script.


That said, I see back-ticks are used improperly all the time.
For example, I would support adding warnings and suggestions to
use system() instead of being used in a void context.  Dangerous
interpolation would be one use case for keeping taint, even.

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>

In This Thread

Prev Next