[#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).
3 messages
2018/08/01
[#88251] Re: [ruby-alerts:8236] failure alert on trunk@P895 (NG (r64134)) — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
ko1c-failure@atdot.net wrote:
3 messages
2018/08/01
[#88305] [Ruby trunk Bug#14968] [PATCH] io.c: make all pipes nonblocking by default — normalperson@...
Issue #14968 has been reported by normalperson (Eric Wong).
4 messages
2018/08/06
[#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).
3 messages
2018/08/08
[#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).
3 messages
2018/08/08
[#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).
4 messages
2018/08/10
[#88467] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/08/14
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).
3 messages
2018/08/14
[#88491] Re: [ruby-cvs:71466] k0kubun:r64374 (trunk): test_function.rb: skip running test — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
k0kubun@ruby-lang.org wrote:
5 messages
2018/08/15
[#88495] Re: [ruby-cvs:71466] k0kubun:r64374 (trunk): test_function.rb: skip running test
— Takashi Kokubun <takashikkbn@...>
2018/08/15
I see. Please remove the test if the test is unnecessary.
[#88496] Re: [ruby-cvs:71466] k0kubun:r64374 (trunk): test_function.rb: skip running test
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/08/15
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).
4 messages
2018/08/17
[#88524] Re: [Ruby trunk Bug#14999] ConditionVariable doesn't reacquire the Mutex if Thread#kill-ed
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/08/18
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).
3 messages
2018/08/19
[#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).
5 messages
2018/08/27
[#88677] Re: [Ruby trunk Misc#15014] thread.c: use rb_hrtime_scalar for high-resolution time operations
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/08/27
ko1@atdot.net wrote:
[#88678] Re: [Ruby trunk Misc#15014] thread.c: use rb_hrtime_scalar for high-resolution time operations
— Koichi Sasada <ko1@...>
2018/08/27
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:
4 messages
2018/08/29
[#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).
3 messages
2018/08/29
[#88767] [Ruby trunk Bug#15050] GC after forking with fibers crashes — ko1@...
Issue #15050 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada).
7 messages
2018/08/31
[#88769] Re: [Ruby trunk Bug#15050] GC after forking with fibers crashes
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/08/31
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:
3 messages
2018/08/31
[ruby-core:88680] Re: [Ruby trunk Misc#15014] thread.c: use rb_hrtime_scalar for high-resolution time operations
From:
Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date:
2018-08-27 09:17:43 UTC
List:
ruby-core #88680
Koichi Sasada <ko1@atdot.net> wrote: > On 2018/08/27 16:16, Eric Wong wrote: > > Yep. Maybe some small systems can benefit with > > usec/msec resolution and uint32_t, though. > > My comment is, if it assumes uint64_t, it is worth to write it explicitly (I > verified this years with `2^64/ (1000 * 1000 * 1000 * 60 * 60 * 24 * 365)` > on google, but it will help for readers). OK, I made r64554 > > > > MY_RUBY_BUILD_MAY_TIME_TRAVEL > > > > > > what is this? > > > > A joke; at least as far as we know it is a joke :> > > I'm not sure why uint64_t doesn't solve time machine problem and uint128_t > solves it. Any RFC arguing it? (time machines should not leap 1.0790283e+22 > years)? It delays the onset of the problem. 585 years well within the known range of human history; but 1.0790283e+22 years is much farther away (probably beyond lifespan of the universe). On the other hand, I don't know how a monotonic clock behaves when a computer travels through time :> > Beside joking, I misunderstand that some systems can change the machine time > (time machine may means it) which affect monotonic time, and I could not > understand why uint128 can solve such system issue. Right, if monotonic time goes out of uint64_t range, things will break. Maybe int128 can hide the problem. But I don't think it's something we need to care about, though (OS would be broken, I think). Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>