[#393742] Getting the class of an object. — Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@...32.com>

Consider;

14 messages 2012/03/06

[#393815] arcadia IDE requires tcl/tk and ruby-tk — Thufir Hawat <hawat.thufir@...>

which or where tcl and tk does arcadia require? Is this a gem which I

13 messages 2012/03/13

[#393952] What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

Hi!

18 messages 2012/03/21
[#393953] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

Active Support has recently added qualified_const_* methods to Module

[#393954] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

Ah, that won't work in 1.8.

[#393959] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 16:43, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393960] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#393961] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 20:48, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393962] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#393967] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/22

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 22:11, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393969] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/22

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#394154] uninitialized constant SOCKSSocket — Resident Moron <lists@...>

I am running ruby 1.9.3 on a linux box. I would like to use

10 messages 2012/03/29

[#394160] Why z = Complex(1,2) rather than z = Complex.new(1,2)? — Ori Ben-Dor <lists@...>

What's this syntax, z = Complex(1,2), as opposed to z =

14 messages 2012/03/29

[#394175] shoes no such file to load -- rubygems — Mr theperson <lists@...>

I have installed shoes to develop GUI applications but when I try and

13 messages 2012/03/29

[#394201] Can't open url with a subdomain with an underscore — Jeroen van Ingen <lists@...>

I try to open the following URL: http://auto_diversen.marktplaza.nl/

10 messages 2012/03/30

[#394222] Ruby openssl ECC help plz — no name <lists@...>

I am confused on how to properly export public ECC key. I can see it

13 messages 2012/03/31

Re: [C extension] How to detect Linux Kernel and glibc version?

From: Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date: 2012-03-08 00:28:18 UTC
List: ruby-talk #393781
I単aki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
> 2012/3/7 Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>:
> > I recently added an extra check for SOCK_* macros because of
> > Debian GNU/kFreeBSD:
> >
> > http://bogomips.org/kgio.git/patch/?id=56cce133d979c22bbef80fdba1881d8f40876e2f
> 
> So SOCK_CLOEXEC is set when loading some .h file, in my case
> /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/socket.h which includes:
> 
> ----------------------------
> SOCK_CLOEXEC = 02000000,   /* Atomically set close-on-exec
>                                                    flag for the new
> descriptor(s).  */
> #define SOCK_CLOEXEC SOCK_CLOEXEC
> -----------------------------
> 
> Am I right?

Yes.

> (I don't understand the purpose of lines 8-14 in your above link).

I assume you meant ext/kgio/missing_accept4.h and not the actual diff:

$ sed -ne 8,14p < ~/kgio/ext/kgio/missing_accept4.h
#    if (02000000 == O_NONBLOCK)
#      define SOCK_CLOEXEC 1
#      define SOCK_NONBLOCK 2
#    else
#      define SOCK_CLOEXEC 02000000
#      define SOCK_NONBLOCK O_NONBLOCK
#    endif

I'm just defining SOCK_* macros so the wrapper function has a way
of making sense of those flags and expose an interface similar
to the accept4() syscall.  Those macros eventually get defined
to the corresponding Kgio::SOCK_* constants in Ruby.

This compatibility workaround of defining macros that look like
system-provide ones is only safe for use private headers, though.
(Don't do anything crazy like resolve the Ruby constants to
 Integers in your source and expect those Integers to work across
 upgrades/different platforms)

In This Thread