[#8478] resolv.rb -- doc patch. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
This is an attempt to get the RD format docs for resolv.rb into
[#8484] strptime fails to properly parse certain inputs — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #5263, was opened at 2006-08-01 23:14
Hi,
Hi,
nobu@ruby-lang.org wrote:
Why bother other languages? They are on their own. We should not
[#8497] Ruby Socket to support SCTP? — Philippe Langlois <philippelanglois@...>
Hi,
[#8504] TCPSocket: bind method missing — hadmut@... (Hadmut Danisch)
Hi,
[#8513] patches for the 1.8.5 deadline... — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
As far as I can tell the only patches which I've submitted which
On Aug 3, 2006, at 10:20 AM, Hugh Sasse wrote:
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Eric Hodel wrote:
[#8522] IRB change for RDoc workaround — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
RDoc chokes on the following code:
[#8525] rdoc bug? — Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@...>
I think I've found a bug in rdoc's handling of C files. Specifically, it
[#8555] Process.gid= fails on OS X — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #5351, was opened at 2006-08-08 01:56
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 17:56:07 +0900
Hi,
Hi,
>>>>> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:31:07 +0900
Hi,
[#8561] sandbox timers & block scopes — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>
Two puzzles I am trying to solve:
On 8/8/06, why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
On 8/16/06, Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:
raise ThisDecayingInquisition, "anyone? anyone at all?"
On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 00:35 +0900, why the lucky stiff wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 02:46:30AM +0900, MenTaLguY wrote:
On 8/15/06, why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
On 8/15/06, Charles O Nutter <headius@headius.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 04:14:33AM +0900, Charles O Nutter wrote:
On 8/15/06, why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
Hi,
[#8568] Pathname.to_a — Marc Haisenko <haisenko@...>
Hi folks,
[#8585] RDoc: extensions spread across multiple C files — Tilman Sauerbeck <tilman@...>
Hi,
Tilman Sauerbeck [2006-08-11 00:39]:
[#8593] ri problem with the latest ruby_1_8 — "Kent Sibilev" <ksruby@...>
Does anyone know why for some strange reason ri doesn't know about any
On Aug 11, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Kent Sibilev wrote:
[#8608] Another ri problem (ruby_1_8 branch) — "Kent Sibilev" <ksruby@...>
I've noticed that many builtin Ruby classes don't have descriptions:
On Aug 12, 2006, at 11:45 PM, Kent Sibilev wrote:
On 8/15/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
[#8609] Again Range=== bug — Ondrej Bilka <neleai@...>
Problem of discrete membership at Range#=== is that it returns unexpected
[#8616] invalid test in "sudo make install-doc"? — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #5415, was opened at 2006-08-14 12:01
[#8662] NODE_WHEN inside a case else body — "Dominik Bathon" <dbatml@...>
Hi,
[#8690] a ruby-core primer — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>
Hello, all. I've been working on the ruby-core page for the new Ruby site.
On 8/22/06, why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
On 8/24/06, Dave Howell <groups+2006@howell.seattle.wa.us> wrote:
[#8709] More ri-problems (ruby_1_8 branch again) — Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
Hi!
[#8735] Legal operator symbols — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...>
Why are :>, :>=, :<=, :< fine as symbols, while := isn't?
Hi --
[#8758] sandbox r50, here we go, loading conflicting gems — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>
Checky.
Re: More ri-problems (ruby_1_8 branch again)
I agree the situation with ri is quite bad. Besides several apparent bugs that must be fixed, ri has a new feature where it collects information about a requested class from all installed gems. I understand the intention for this, but the implementation is not good enough. For example, when I want to see methods of class Array, ri shows me methods from builtin Array class plus methods added to Array by all gem authors. But it doesn't show me what gem a particular method comes from. This is wrong!!! Considering that no one can force gem authors to provide a complete rdoc for their libraries, in the result you have a mess. Can I ask to make this feature optional and make --system option enabled by default, until the situation is resolved? Thank you. On 8/24/06, Johan Holmberg <holmberg@iar.se> wrote: > Hi! > > I have noticed the previous threads about problems with ri in the > upcoming 1.8.5. Today I tried ri myself using a fresh CVS-checkout of > the "ruby_1_8" branch. > > There seem to be quite a number of problems. I don't know if some of > them are "wellknown" and considered unimportant to fix in 1.8.5. But it > seems to me that it would be a good idea to fix some of them before the > 1.8.5 release. > > Below is a list of things I found. I mention some things only once, even > if it reappears in severals classes. > > /Johan Holmberg > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ri Array > -------- > > - "each_cons", "each_slice", "enum_cons", "enum_slice", > "enum_with_index" are *not* members of the included Enumerable > (they are defined in the "enumerator" library) > > - "pretty_print", "pretty_print_cycle" are *not* members of Array > (they are defined in the "pp" library) > > - there is no method "quote" > > - "to_yaml", "yaml_initialize" are *not* members of Array > > - what is "dclone" ??? > > > ri Bignum > --------- > > - operators "/" and "**" mentioned twice > > - there is no method "power!" (but see library "rational") > > > ri Dir > ------ > > - garbage intro text for class > > ri Errno > -------- > > - garbage text for class > > ri File > ------- > > - garbage intro text for class > > > ri String > --------- > > - methods & constants from several others source (that re-open String) > > > ri Time > ------- > > - garbage intro text for class > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > -- Kent --- http://www.datanoise.com