[#35400] Fwd: [ruby-cvs:38176] Ruby:r30994 (trunk): * string.c (rb_str_byteslice): the resulted encoding should keep — "Martin J. Dst" <duerst@...>
I'm really surprised that the encoding is kept for an arbitrary byteslice.
3 messages
2011/03/01
[#35403] Why are hash keys sometimes duped? — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
Why are some objects duped when they are used as hash keys and other
6 messages
2011/03/01
[#35407] Re: Why are hash keys sometimes duped?
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/03/01
Aaron Patterson <[email protected]> wrote:
[#35417] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4463][Open] [PATCH] release GVL for fcntl() for operations that may block — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
8 messages
2011/03/03
[#35418] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4463][Open] [PATCH] release GVL for fcntl() for operations that may block
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/03
> Issue #4463 has been reported by Eric Wong.
[#35424] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4463][Open] [PATCH] release GVL for fcntl() for operations that may block
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/04
Hi
[#35425] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4463][Open] [PATCH] release GVL for fcntl() for operations that may block
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/03/04
KOSAKI Motohiro <[email protected]> wrote:
[#35428] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4463][Open] [PATCH] release GVL for fcntl() for operations that may block
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/05
Hi
[#35426] [Ruby 1.8 - Bug #4467][Open] Process.maxgroups= should only accept numeric values — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...>
10 messages
2011/03/04
[#35440] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #1047] request: getters, setters for the GC — Narihiro Nakamura <authorNari@...>
4 messages
2011/03/07
[#35446] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4477][Open] Kernel:exec and backtick (`) don't work for certain system commands — Joachim Wuttke <j.wuttke@...>
10 messages
2011/03/07
[#35462] Source for 1.8 syck gram.y and token.re? — Kurt Stephens <ks@...>
I found bug in 1.8 ext/syck. The problem is in gram.c and/or token.c.
7 messages
2011/03/07
[#35467] Re: Source for 1.8 syck gram.y and token.re?
— Kurt Stephens <ks@...>
2011/03/08
This is obviously dead and gone: http://whytheluckystiff.net/syck/
[#35468] Re: Source for 1.8 syck gram.y and token.re?
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/03/08
Syck is dead. 1.9 should make Psych/libyaml default. The fact that
[#35469] Re: Source for 1.8 syck gram.y and token.re?
— Kurt Stephens <ks@...>
2011/03/08
I know syck is dead.
[#35472] Re: Source for 1.8 syck gram.y and token.re?
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/03/09
Maybe it's possible to bribe Aaron into releasing a Psych gem for 1.8?
[#35483] /proc/$PID/environ in Linux — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I wanted to inspect the environment of a long-running process[1] and I
5 messages
2011/03/10
[#35494] Re: can someone explain this? — Michael Edgar <adgar@...>
[+ruby-core]
1 message
2011/03/13
[#35509] Why has defined? been changed for autoloaded constants in 1.9? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Hi!
6 messages
2011/03/17
[#35513] String#upcase and UTF-8/Unicode not working — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Why does the following print =E2=80=9D=C3=A4BC=E2=80=9D instead of =E2=80=
3 messages
2011/03/17
[#35519] NoMethodError#message may take very long to execute — Adiel Mittmann <adiel@...>
Hello,
5 messages
2011/03/17
[#35528] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4512][Open] [PATCH] ext/fcntl/fcntl.c: add F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC constant — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
9 messages
2011/03/20
[#35536] File.write take 4 — Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
Hello all.
6 messages
2011/03/21
[#36090] Fwd: File.write take 4
— Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
2011/05/10
Could I get any feedback on my latest patch for File.write?
[#35552] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4523][Open] Kernel#require to return the path of the loaded file — Alex Young <alex@...>
14 messages
2011/03/24
[#43442] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4523] Kernel#require to return the path of the loaded file
— nobu <nobu@...>
2012/03/18
[#43467] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #4523] Kernel#require to return the path of the loaded file
— Alex Young <alex@...>
2012/03/19
On 18/03/12 10:22, nobu wrote:
[#43469] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #4523] Kernel#require to return the path of the loaded file
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2012/03/19
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Alex Young <[email protected]> wrote:
[#43477] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #4523] Kernel#require to return the path of the loaded file
— Alex Young <alex@...>
2012/03/19
On 19/03/12 11:58, Luis Lavena wrote:
[#35555] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4527][Open] [PATCH] IO#close releases GVL if possible — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
10 messages
2011/03/25
[#35565] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][Open] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
33 messages
2011/03/28
[#35569] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][Open] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/28
> ref: [ruby-core:35527]
[#35572] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][Open] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/03/28
KOSAKI Motohiro <[email protected]> wrote:
[#35583] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][Open] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/29
2011/3/29 Eric Wong <[email protected]>:
[#35981] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/05/03
[#35958] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/04/30
[#35959] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531][PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/04/30
Comment for patch 2.
[#35989] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/05/04
[#35990] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/05/04
Motohiro KOSAKI <[email protected]> wrote:
[#35991] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/05/04
[#35992] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4531] [PATCH 0/7] use poll() instead of select() in certain cases
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/05/04
diff --git a/ext/-test-/wait_for_single_fd/wait_for_single_fd.c
[#35566] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4532][Open] [PATCH] add IO#pread and IO#pwrite methods — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
12 messages
2011/03/28
[#35570] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4532][Open] [PATCH] add IO#pread and IO#pwrite methods
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/03/28
2011/3/28 Eric Wong <[email protected]>:
[#35573] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4532][Open] [PATCH] add IO#pread and IO#pwrite methods
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/03/28
KOSAKI Motohiro <[email protected]> wrote:
[#35567] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4534][Open] ri does not open $PAGER with program name only — Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
5 messages
2011/03/28
[#35586] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4538][Open] [PATCH (cleanup)] avoid unnecessary select() calls before doing I/O — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
9 messages
2011/03/29
[#35596] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4538] [PATCH (cleanup)] avoid unnecessary select() calls before doing I/O
— Charles Nutter <headius@...>
2011/04/01
[#35598] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4538] [PATCH (cleanup)] avoid unnecessary select() calls before doing I/O
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/04/01
Charles Nutter <[email protected]> wrote:
[ruby-core:35516] Re: Why has defined? been changed for autoloaded constants in 1.9?
On Mar 17, 2011, at 2:14 AM, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > Hi! >=20 > Why has defined? been changed for autoloaded constants in 1.9? >=20 > In 1.8 the following prints "constant": >=20 > autoload :A, 'a' > puts defined?(A) >=20 > In 1.9 it prints nil. >=20 > Why the change? I can see how it makes sense, sort of, but I have a = test for >=20 > defined? ::Gem::Specification >=20 > to test whether RubyGems has been loaded. >=20 > How do I perform this test in 1.9? (I could of course change the test > to the less restrictive defined? ::Gem, but I want to know if there=92s > a new way one should use for performing tests for loaded features like > this one.) Just check for Gem. $ ruby -v -e 'p Object.const_defined?(:Gem)' ruby 1.9.2p180 (2011-02-18 revision 30909) [x86_64-darwin10.6.0] true $ ruby --disable-gems -v -e 'p Object.const_defined?(:Gem)' ruby 1.9.2p180 (2011-02-18 revision 30909) [x86_64-darwin10.6.0] false