[#39227] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5264][Open] Commit 33157 — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>
3 messages
2011/09/01
[#39241] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #3422][Closed] Object.const_get(:A, false) can access BasicObject::A — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
5 messages
2011/09/03
[#39251] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #3422][Closed] Object.const_get(:A, false) can access BasicObject::A
— Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>
2011/09/03
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 04:57, Nobuyoshi Nakada <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39258] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #3422][Closed] Object.const_get(:A, false) can access BasicObject::A
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/09/04
> Why is this issue closed? Is the current behaviour acceptable?
[#39260] RubySpec vs CRuby's test/... — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...>
Before the release of Ruby 1.9.2 it was decided that Ruby releases
59 messages
2011/09/04
[#39263] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/09/04
Hi,
[#39269] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
2011/09/05
(09/05/2011 03:54 AM), Marc-Andre Lafortune wrote:
[#39270] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...>
2011/09/05
Hi,
[#39275] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/09/05
2011/9/5 Marc-Andre Lafortune <[email protected]>:
[#39328] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...>
2011/09/07
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 3:08 AM, NARUSE, Yui <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39276] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/09/05
2011/9/5 Marc-Andre Lafortune <[email protected]>:
[#39325] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/09/07
I'll jump in with some context from the JRuby perspective.
[#39335] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/09/07
2011/9/7 Charles Oliver Nutter <[email protected]>:
[#39365] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/09/08
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:17 AM, NARUSE, Yui <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39366] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/09/08
Hi,
[#39370] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Michael Klishin <michael.s.klishin@...>
2011/09/08
Yukihiro Matsumoto:
[#39374] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/09/08
(2011/09/09 1:29), Michael Klishin wrote:
[#39376] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/09/08
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:19 PM, NARUSE, Yui <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39379] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Masaya TARUI <tarui@...>
2011/09/08
Hello Luis,
[#39382] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/09/08
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Masaya TARUI <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39386] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/09/08
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Luis Lavena <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39387] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/09/08
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
[#39388] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2011/09/08
(2011/09/08 15:28), Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
[#39394] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/09/09
2011/9/9 Charles Oliver Nutter <[email protected]>:
[#39396] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/09/09
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 9:47 PM, NARUSE, Yui <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39414] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Kirk Haines <wyhaines@...>
2011/09/09
I realize that I'm a small fish in this ocean, but for every release
[#39418] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...
— Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
2011/09/09
(09/09/2011 03:51 PM), Kirk Haines wrote:
[#39267] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5273][Open] Float#round returns the wrong floats for higher precision — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>
14 messages
2011/09/04
[#39279] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5276][Assigned] 4294967295.8.round is 4294967295 on 32bit — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>
8 messages
2011/09/05
[#39318] [Backport93 - Backport #5276] 4294967295.8.round is 4294967295 on 32bit
— Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>
2011/09/07
[#39304] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5285][Open] Ruby 1.9.2 throws exception on sort of array containing true AND false values — Martin Corino <mcorino@...>
4 messages
2011/09/06
[#39309] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5287][Open] 1.9.3 - Interpolation in a string causes the string's encoding to be set to ASCII-8BIT — Jon Leighton <j@...>
7 messages
2011/09/06
[#39311] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5287] 1.9.3 - Interpolation in a string causes the string's encoding to be set to ASCII-8BIT
— Jon Leighton <j@...>
2011/09/06
[#39326] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5291][Open] Enabling GC Profiler GC_PROFILE_MORE_DETAIL and CALC_EXACT_MALLOC_SIZE — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>
6 messages
2011/09/07
[#39360] What is the role of rb_objspace_t in gc.c? — Kurt Stephens <ks@...>
What is the role of rb_objectspace_t and the pointers to it inside gc.c?
4 messages
2011/09/08
[#39380] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5299][Open] Segmentation fault when using TweetStream gem in ruby 1.9.3 — Dushyanth Maguluru <dushyanth.maguluru@...>
6 messages
2011/09/08
[#39435] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5306][Open] Application Hangs Due to Recent rb_thread_select Changes — Charlie Savage <cfis@...>
27 messages
2011/09/09
[#39475] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5306] Application Hangs Due to Recent rb_thread_select Changes
— Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/09/11
[#39450] Comments on HowToReportEnglish — Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
I've done some proofreading for HowToReportEnglish, and I'd like to
8 messages
2011/09/10
[#39452] Re: Comments on HowToReportEnglish
— Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...>
2011/09/10
Hello,
[#39453] Re: Comments on HowToReportEnglish
— Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...>
2011/09/10
Hello
[#39451] File.realpath behavior questions — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
10 messages
2011/09/10
[#39466] Re: File.realpath behavior questions
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/09/11
Hi,
[#39472] Re: File.realpath behavior questions
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/09/11
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:48 AM, Nobuyoshi Nakada <[email protected]> wrot=
[#39480] Modifications to libraries like Rake should be done upstream first — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
3 messages
2011/09/12
[#39484] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5309][Open] 0.6.to_r != "0.6".to_r — Brian Ford <brixen@...>
5 messages
2011/09/12
[#39487] File::BINARY does not behave as advertised — Cameron Pope <camerooni@...>
Hello -
4 messages
2011/09/12
[#39489] Re: File::BINARY does not behave as advertised
— mathew <meta@...>
2011/09/12
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 16:00, Cameron Pope <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39498] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5310][Open] Integral objects — Kenta Murata <muraken@...>
13 messages
2011/09/13
[#39500] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5310][Open] Integral objects
— brian ford <brixen@...>
2011/09/13
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Kenta Murata <[email protected]> wrote:
[#39539] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5321][Open] Introducing Numeric#exact? and Numeric#inexact? — Kenta Murata <muraken@...>
26 messages
2011/09/14
[#39597] File.expand_path ~username always trigger ArgumentError on Windows — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
3 messages
2011/09/17
[#39618] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5335][Open] [RFC/PATCH] test_old_thread_select: timing tweaks — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
5 messages
2011/09/19
[#39627] Re: [ruby-cvs:40472] drbrain:r33294 (trunk): * test/openssl/test_ssl.rb (class OpenSSL): Test — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
(2011/09/19 9:28), [email protected] wrote:
5 messages
2011/09/19
[#39628] Re: [ruby-cvs:40472] drbrain:r33294 (trunk): * test/openssl/test_ssl.rb (class OpenSSL): Test
— Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
2011/09/19
On Sep 19, 2011, at 11:33 AM, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
[#39667] Re: [ruby-cvs:40472] drbrain:r33294 (trunk): * test/openssl/test_ssl.rb (class OpenSSL): Test
— Martin Bo煬et <martin.bosslet@...>
2011/09/22
2011/9/19 Eric Hodel <[email protected]>:
[#39629] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5341][Open] Add SSL session reuse to Net::HTTP — Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
18 messages
2011/09/19
[#40396] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5341] Add SSL session reuse to Net::HTTP
— Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
2011/10/26
[#40413] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5341] Add SSL session reuse to Net::HTTP
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/10/26
On 10/26/2011 11:39 AM, Eric Hodel wrote:
[#39632] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5342][Open] ConditionVariable can wake a Thread that is no longer waiting on it — Mike Perham <mperham@...>
3 messages
2011/09/20
[#39634] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5343][Open] Unexpected blocking behavior when interrupt Socket#accept — Tomoyuki Chikanaga <nagachika00@...>
10 messages
2011/09/20
[#39639] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5343] Unexpected blocking behavior when interrupt Socket#accept
— Tomoyuki Chikanaga <nagachika00@...>
2011/09/20
[#39672] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5352][Open] How about using <> to represent Here Document? — Joey Zhou <yimutang@...>
7 messages
2011/09/22
[#39673] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5353][Open] TLS v1.0 and less - Attack on CBC mode — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>
13 messages
2011/09/22
[#39684] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5357][Open] Indentation of nested operators should nest — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
7 messages
2011/09/23
[#39690] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5360][Open] BasicObject#binding — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
6 messages
2011/09/24
[#39696] Time spent on expanding load path — Juan Wajnerman <jwajnerman@...>
I've been following the performance of Ruby 1.9.x since the beginning. I =
4 messages
2011/09/24
[#39700] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5364][Open] How about new syntax: "object.\method" returns a Method instance? — Joey Zhou <yimutang@...>
20 messages
2011/09/25
[#39704] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5365][Open] WEBrick lacks the application/javascript and image/svg+xml MIME types. — Hal Brodigan <postmodern.mod3@...>
4 messages
2011/09/25
[#39740] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol — Alex Young <alex@...>
18 messages
2011/09/27
[#39743] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
2011/09/27
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 06:18:19PM +0900, Alex Young wrote:
[#39754] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Alex Young <alex@...>
2011/09/27
On 27/09/2011 19:46, Aaron Patterson wrote:
[#39807] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
2011/10/01
On Sep 27, 2011, at 6:52 PM, Alex Young wrote:
[#39843] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Alex Young <alex@...>
2011/10/02
Eric Hodel wrote in post #1024462:
[#39936] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/10/04
Hi,
[#39943] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5372][Open] Promote blank? to a core protocol
— Alex Young <alex@...>
2011/10/04
On 04/10/11 16:52, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#39772] ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
13 messages
2011/09/29
[#39774] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/09/29
Hi,
[#39785] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— hemant <gethemant@...>
2011/09/30
Hi,
[#39789] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2011/09/30
(2011/09/30 5:37), hemant wrote:
[#39812] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— Tim Felgentreff <[email protected]>
2011/10/01
On 09/30/2011 07:08 AM, SASADA Koichi wrote:
[#47627] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2012/09/21
Revisit.
[#47682] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
2012/09/24
On Sep 20, 2012, at 6:14 PM, SASADA Koichi <[email protected]> wrote:
[#47686] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2012/09/25
(2012/09/25 7:38), Eric Hodel wrote:
[#47687] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— Narihiro Nakamura <authornari@...>
2012/09/25
I'm sorry for late reply.
[#47688] Re: ObjectSpace.reference_form(obj) #=> references_array
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2012/09/25
(2012/09/25 15:18), Narihiro Nakamura wrote:
[#39787] Running the YARV parser/compiler without GC? — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>
Hey smart folks,
3 messages
2011/09/30
[ruby-core:39658] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5333][Third Party's Issue] Coverage library giving wrong results
From:
Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
Date:
2011-09-21 16:34:07 UTC
List:
ruby-core #39658
Issue #5333 has been updated by Yusuke Endoh.
Status changed from Open to Third Party's Issue
Hello,
Some people told me that the issue reproduces on os x. Thanks!
@nagachika, @n0kada and I investigated this issue. As a result,
I'm sad that I'd have to say this is third party's issue.
The following patch will show the mechanism of this issue.
diff --git a/app/models/competition.rb b/app/models/competition.rb
index 9c0ee55..04f1446 100644
--- a/app/models/competition.rb
+++ b/app/models/competition.rb
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+p :load
class Competition < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :news
@@ -7,6 +8,7 @@ class Competition < ActiveRecord::Base
private
def cannot_end_before_it_started
unless starts_at.nil? or ends_at.nil?
+ p :call
errors.add(:ends_at, "can't be prior to start date") if ends_at < starts_at
end
end
With it applied, rake spec prints the following output (on my Ubuntu):
$ rake spec
(in /home/mame/work/ruby/coverage-bug)
:load
Competition
GET /competitions/:id
:load
:call
should display basic information
Competition
validations
:call
should require ends_at >= starts_at
Finished in 0.55506 seconds
2 examples, 0 failures
["/home/mame/work/ruby/coverage-bug/app/models/competition.rb",
[1, 1, 1, nil, 1, 1, nil, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, nil, nil, nil]]
So we can see the events occur in the following order on Ubuntu:
:load -> :load -> :call -> :call
According to @nagachika, the trace on os x is:
:load -> :call -> :call -> :load
when factory_girl is used. Otherwise:
:load -> :call -> :load -> :call
Reloading the same file means clearing the coverage of the file
so far. To measure correct coverage, the event order should be:
:load -> :call -> :call
I'm not sure which library is ill-designed, but I suspect
active_support; it seems to load app/models/competition.rb
twice via const_missing, which also causes such an unstable
(platform-dependent) event order, I guess. You can see this
by replacing "p :load" with "p *caller" in the above patch.
Is active_support developer seeing this ticket?
Or could anyone inform them?
Thanks,
--
Yusuke Endoh <[email protected]>
----------------------------------------
Bug #5333: Coverage library giving wrong results
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5333
Author: Christoph Olszowka
Status: Third Party's Issue
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yusuke Endoh
Category: lib
Target version: 1.9.2
ruby -v: -
I'm the author of the simplecov gem, a wrapper on top of the Coverage library. You can find it on Github at https://github.com/colszowka/simplecov
I keep getting reports from users that code they have cleary tested is not reported as covered (you can find it a discussion at https://github.com/colszowka/simplecov/issues/60). This was very hard to trace back since no one was able to give me code samples so far. A couple of days ago, a user finally came up with a sample rails application where this problem was visible in conjunction with FactoryGirl.
I tried this out using the Coverage library directly, and the result was the same: Creating the record directly reported the file as covered, doing the same with FactoryGirl reported a coverage of 0 for certain lines - even though they were executed.
I forked the application and added some instructions to the readme. You can find it at https://github.com/colszowka/coverage-bug
I verified this on the latest 1.9.2 release as well as 1.9.3-preview1:
ruby 1.9.3dev (2011-07-31 revision 32789) [x86_64-darwin11.0.0]
ruby 1.9.2p290 (2011-07-09 revision 32553) [x86_64-darwin11.0.0]
I'm not sure why this happens in conjunction with FactoryGirl, but the code inside the if-statement is being executed in that case as well as I verified by adding a raise inside there and getting a correctly failing rspec suite.
Please let me know if you need any further information on this
--
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org