[#88240] [Ruby trunk Feature#14759] [PATCH] set M_ARENA_MAX for glibc malloc — sam.saffron@...
Issue #14759 has been updated by sam.saffron (Sam Saffron).
[#88251] Re: [ruby-alerts:8236] failure alert on trunk@P895 (NG (r64134)) — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
ko1c-failure@atdot.net wrote:
[#88305] [Ruby trunk Bug#14968] [PATCH] io.c: make all pipes nonblocking by default — normalperson@...
Issue #14968 has been reported by normalperson (Eric Wong).
[#88331] [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — samuel@...
Issue #13618 has been updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams).
[#88342] [Ruby trunk Feature#14955] [PATCH] gc.c: use MADV_FREE to release most of the heap page body — ko1@...
Issue #14955 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
[#88433] [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — ko1@...
Issue #13618 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
ko1@atdot.net wrote:
[#88475] [Ruby trunk Misc#14937] [PATCH] thread_pthread: lazy-spawn timer-thread only on contention — ko1@...
Issue #14937 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
[#88491] Re: [ruby-cvs:71466] k0kubun:r64374 (trunk): test_function.rb: skip running test — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
k0kubun@ruby-lang.org wrote:
I see. Please remove the test if the test is unnecessary.
Takashi Kokubun <takashikkbn@gmail.com> wrote:
[#88523] [Ruby trunk Bug#14999] ConditionVariable doesn't reacquire the Mutex if Thread#kill-ed — eregontp@...
Issue #14999 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
eregontp@gmail.com wrote:
[#88549] [Ruby trunk Bug#14999] ConditionVariable doesn't reacquire the Mutex if Thread#kill-ed — eregontp@...
Issue #14999 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
[#88676] [Ruby trunk Misc#15014] thread.c: use rb_hrtime_scalar for high-resolution time operations — ko1@...
Issue #15014 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
ko1@atdot.net wrote:
On 2018/08/27 16:16, Eric Wong wrote:
[#88716] Re: [ruby-dev:43715] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #595] Fiber ignores ensure clause — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Koichi Sasada wrote:
[#88723] [Ruby trunk Bug#15041] [PATCH] cont.c: set th->root_fiber to current fiber at fork — ko1@...
Issue #15041 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
[#88767] [Ruby trunk Bug#15050] GC after forking with fibers crashes — ko1@...
Issue #15050 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
Koichi Sasada <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#88774] Re: [ruby-alerts:8955] failure alert on trunk@P895 (NG (r64594)) — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
ko1c-failure@atdot.net wrote:
[ruby-core:88515] [CommonRuby Feature#8661] Add option to print backstrace in reverse order(stack frames first & error last)
Issue #8661 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh). Over one year has passed since the backtrace order was reversed. But I'm not still used to the new order. I agree with Samuel's points. In addition, the old order was more useful because it shows the last debug output and the exception message in one place. ``` $ ruby24 test.rb ... ... "debug print" "debug print" "the last debug print" test.rb:X:in 'buggy_func': exception message from test.rb:X:in `foo' from test.rb:X:in `bar' ... ... ``` In the above output, `"the last debug output"` and `test.rb:X:in 'buggy_func': exception message` are placed in one place. It is easy to understand the situation and to start debugging. However, the current behavior separates the two. This is very frastrating. ``` $ ruby25 test.rb ... ... "debug print" "debug print" "the last debug print" ... ... from test.rb:X:in `bar' from test.rb:X:in `foo' test.rb:X:in 'buggy_func': exception message ``` Is there any change to revert the change? ---------------------------------------- Feature #8661: Add option to print backstrace in reverse order(stack frames first & error last) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8661#change-73573 * Author: gary4gar (Gaurish Sharma) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Target version: ---------------------------------------- Currently the way ruby prints the backtrace is that the error comes first & then the stack frames. like this ``` Main Error Message stack frame 1 stack frame 2 stack frame 3 ..... ``` this is perfectly fine provided 1. Backstraces are short, so fits in terminal.hence, no need to scroll. 2. you read it from top to bottom. But, I am a rails developer where 1. Backstraces are always HUGE, therefore seldom don't fit in terminal. Means LOTS of scrolling to do everytime we get an error. 2. in terminal we tend to read backstraces from bottom to top, especially when tailing(tail -f) the production logs. 3. people, who practice Test-driven development literally spend most of their time scrolling to read backstraces to the point most end up buying a larger display. Proposed Solution: Please add a way so we can configure backstraces to be printed in reverse order. so if you are reading from bottom, say from terminal, you can get the main error message without need to scroll. like this ``` stack frame 3 stack frame 2 stack frame 1 Main Error Message ..... ``` this would save lot of time because when the error message is print at the bottom, no need to scroll for reading it. Not sure if this can be done today. I tried Overriding Exception#backtrace but it caused stack level too deep & illegal hardware instruction Error. Attached are currently what backstrace currently looks like & how there be an option to make it look for comparison. ---Files-------------------------------- current.log (5.13 KB) proposed.log (4.9 KB) -- 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>