[#40602] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5532][Open] Compile problem for bigdecimal on cygwin — Martin Dürst <duerst@...>
14 messages
2011/11/01
[#40646] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5541][Open] Better configure error message when llvm-gcc is the default compiler — Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
10 messages
2011/11/01
[#41137] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5541][Open] Better configure error message when llvm-gcc is the default compiler
— Motohiro KOSAKI <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/18
[#40647] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5542][Open] Ruby 1.9.3-p0 changed arity on default initialization method — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>
7 messages
2011/11/01
[#40682] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5542] Ruby 1.9.3-p0 changed arity on default initialization method
— Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>
2011/11/02
[#40648] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5543][Open] rb_thread_blocking_region() API is poorly designed — Christopher Huff <cjameshuff@...>
14 messages
2011/11/01
[#40662] Relevant methods not appearing in RDoc — Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
The method Module.private_constant isn't appearing in
6 messages
2011/11/01
[#40663] Re: Relevant methods not appearing in RDoc
— Eric Hodel <[email protected]>
2011/11/01
On Nov 1, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Andrew Grimm wrote:
[#40664] Re: Relevant methods not appearing in RDoc
— Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
2011/11/01
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Eric Hodel <[email protected]> wrote:
[#40684] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555][Open] rename #include? to #includes? — Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>
20 messages
2011/11/02
[#40966] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555] rename #include? to #includes?
— Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
2011/11/12
[#43765] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555][Rejected] rename #include? to #includes?
— "matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)" <matz@...>
2012/03/27
[#44592] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555][Rejected] rename #include? to #includes?
— Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
2012/04/24
> The basic naming for methods in standard class libraries are:
[#44602] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555][Rejected] rename #include? to #includes?
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2012/04/24
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 15:47, Roger Pack <[email protected]> wrote:
[#44603] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5555][Rejected] rename #include? to #includes?
— Roger Pack <rogerdpack2@...>
2012/04/24
>> It always confuses me how that one defies the rule.
[#40688] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5556][Open] SIGHUP no longer ignored when sent to process group from a subprocess — Brian Ford <brixen@...>
12 messages
2011/11/02
[#40706] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5562][Open] Improvement of Windows IO performance — Hiroshi Shirosaki <h.shirosaki@...>
39 messages
2011/11/03
[#40737] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5570][Open] Encoding of environment variables on Windows — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
11 messages
2011/11/04
[#43237] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5570][Feedback] Encoding of environment variables on Windows
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2012/03/11
[#43289] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5570][Feedback] Encoding of environment variables on Windows
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2012/03/15
Hello,
[#40748] Proposal for sustainable branch maintenance — "Yuki Sonoda (Yugui)" <yugui@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
14 messages
2011/11/05
[#40753] Re: Proposal for sustainable branch maintenance
— Trans <transfire@...>
2011/11/05
Why maintain 1.9.1 at all? I don't see the benefit. People need to
[#40813] Re: Proposal for sustainable branch maintenance
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/11/07
Hello,
[#40751] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5574][Open] Make arrays comparable — Arnau Sanchez <rbarnau@...>
8 messages
2011/11/05
[#40770] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5578][Open] Embedded YAML for Ruby 2.0 — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
17 messages
2011/11/06
[#40816] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5578] Embedded YAML for Ruby 2.0
— Kurt Stephens <ks.ruby@...>
2011/11/07
[#40806] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5583][Open] Optionally typing — Yasushi ANDO <andyjpn@...>
21 messages
2011/11/07
[#40824] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5588][Open] add negation flag (v) to Regexp — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>
38 messages
2011/11/08
[#40840] A quiz: Re: Second patch attempt for PATH_MAX fix in ruby1.9.1- 1.9.3~rc1-3 — Svante Signell <svante.signell@...>
Hello,
4 messages
2011/11/08
[#40845] [Ruby 1.8 - Bug #5599][Open] YAML.load_documents — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
5 messages
2011/11/08
[#40865] IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I'm not sure if this is a bug or intended as spec.
16 messages
2011/11/09
[#41151] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/11/19
2011/11/9 Eric Wong <[email protected]>:
[#41166] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/20
>> I noticed when a file name argument is passed to the IO.copy_stream, the
[#41168] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Clifford Heath <clifford.heath@...>
2011/11/20
On 20/11/2011, at 5:09 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[#41176] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/11/21
2011/11/20 Clifford Heath <[email protected]>:
[#41180] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/21
>> I think documentation is the wrong answer. The security defects are not caused
[#41181] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/11/21
2011/11/22 KOSAKI Motohiro <[email protected]>:
[#41185] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Clifford Heath <clifford.heath@...>
2011/11/22
On 22/11/2011, at 9:39 AM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#41196] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/11/22
2011/11/22 Clifford Heath <[email protected]>:
[#41219] Re: IO.copy_stream creates files with restrictive permissions
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/22
>> The umask that almost every Unix distribution has always had in /etc/profile - which is 022.
[#40867] Question regarding Ruby 2.0 backwards compatibility — Martin Bo煬et <martin.bosslet@...>
If I recall it correctly, the goal for 2.0 was to stay API-compatible
3 messages
2011/11/09
[#40898] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5605][Open] [PATCH] net/http: use IO.copy_stream for requests using body_stream — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
7 messages
2011/11/10
[#40908] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5607][Open] Inconsistent reaction in Range of String — Yen-Nan Lin <redmine@...>
15 messages
2011/11/10
[#40941] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5617][Open] Allow install RubyGems into dediceted directory — Vit Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>
22 messages
2011/11/11
[#40943] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5619][Open] Segfault on OS X — Otto Hilska <otto@...>
9 messages
2011/11/11
[#40951] [Backport93 - Backport #5621][Open] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch — Mike Perham <mperham@...>
25 messages
2011/11/12
[#40971] [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Mike Perham <mperham@...>
2011/11/12
[#40972] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
2011/11/12
Unfortunately ruby-head has a deadlock in one of my go-to scenarios for
[#40976] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/11/13
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[#41128] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/11/18
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Hiroshi Nakamura <[email protected]> wrote:
[#41129] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/11/18
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[#41142] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/11/18
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Hiroshi Nakamura <[email protected]> wro=
[#41144] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/11/18
(2011/11/19 6:31), Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
[#41145] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
2011/11/19
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Hiroshi Nakamura <[email protected]> wrot=
[#41173] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/11/21
(2011/11/19 9:08), Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
[#40977] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5621] Please backport thread-safe autoloading patch
— Hiroshi Nakamura <nahi@...>
2011/11/13
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[#40982] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5625][Open] Remove profanity and pejoratives — Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
30 messages
2011/11/13
[#40993] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5625][Third Party's Issue] Remove profanity and pejoratives
— Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
2011/11/13
[#40996] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5625][Third Party's Issue] Remove profanity and pejoratives
— Andrew Grimm <andrew.j.grimm@...>
2011/11/13
I was not aiming to protect children from the f-word. My intention was
[#41004] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5628][Open] Module#basename — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
18 messages
2011/11/14
[#41024] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5632][Open] Attempt to open included class shades it instead. — Boris Stitnicky <boris@...>
12 messages
2011/11/14
[#41025] Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural? — JosFrancisco Calvo Moreno <josefranciscocalvo@...>
Hi all!
11 messages
2011/11/14
[#41027] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— Jeremy Evans <code@...>
2011/11/14
On 11/15 12:58, Jos? Francisco Calvo Moreno wrote:
[#41031] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— JosFrancisco Calvo Moreno <josefranciscocalvo@...>
2011/11/14
Hi Jeremy,
[#41034] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— Chuck Remes <cremes.devlist@...>
2011/11/14
[#41036] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— JosFrancisco Calvo Moreno <josefranciscocalvo@...>
2011/11/14
Hi Chuck,
[#41037] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— Anurag Priyam <anurag08priyam@...>
2011/11/14
2011/11/14 Jos=E9 Francisco Calvo Moreno <[email protected]>:
[#41058] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— JosFrancisco Calvo Moreno <josefranciscocalvo@...>
2011/11/15
I don't have a deep understanding of ruby core base types but I want to
[#41064] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2011/11/15
On IEEE 754 Floating Point Numbers, there are positive 0.0 and negative 0.0=
[#41071] Re: Proposal to add new methods: positive? negative? natural?
— JosFrancisco Calvo Moreno <josefranciscocalvo@...>
2011/11/16
Do you suggest the following?
[#41038] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5634][Open] yield and binding — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
17 messages
2011/11/14
[#50144] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5634] yield and binding
— "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>
2012/11/26
[#50210] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5634] yield and binding
— "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>
2012/11/27
[#41078] mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Hi!
7 messages
2011/11/16
[#41091] Re: mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/17
Hi,
[#41094] Re: mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2011/11/17
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 07:24, Nobuyoshi Nakada <[email protected]> wrote:
[#41107] Re: mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/17
Hi,
[#41108] Re: mkmf sets CFLAGS to contain flags that it shouldn't be setting
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2011/11/17
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 14:46, Nobuyoshi Nakada <[email protected]> wrote:
[#41079] Why doesn’t mkmf’s have_macro add a HAVE_X to $defs? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Hi!
5 messages
2011/11/16
[#41092] Re: Why doesn’t mkmf’s have_macro add a HAVE_X to $defs?
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/17
Hi,
[#41086] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5644][Open] add Enumerable#exclude? antonym — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>
14 messages
2011/11/17
[#41114] [Backport93 - Backport #5646][Open] Backport r33775 — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
9 messages
2011/11/17
[#41401] [Backport93 - Backport #5646][Closed] Backport r33775
— Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
2011/11/30
[#41414] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5646][Closed] Backport r33775
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/30
> Also, is there a script for doing backports? =A0It looks like the commit =
[#41420] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5646][Closed] Backport r33775
— Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...>
2011/12/01
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 02:19:31AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[#41422] Re: [Backport93 - Backport #5646][Closed] Backport r33775
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/12/01
>> > Also, is there a script for doing backports? =A0It looks like the comm=
[#41116] Pathname['abc'] instead of Pathname('abc') global method as constructor alternative — "Alexander E. Fischer" <aef@...>
Hello,
3 messages
2011/11/17
[#41149] autoload will be dead — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hi,
11 messages
2011/11/19
[#41150] Re: autoload will be dead
— Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
2011/11/19
Does this also mean that we will not enhance const_missing to support
[#41160] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5650][Open] Add rb_enc_raise() to allow C extensions to raise errors with messages with correct encoding — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
3 messages
2011/11/19
[#41161] conflict between 1.8.7 and 1.9.3 installations — Joel VanderWerf <joelvanderwerf@...>
6 messages
2011/11/19
[#41162] Re: conflict between 1.8.7 and 1.9.3 installations
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/20
Hi,
[#41164] Re: conflict between 1.8.7 and 1.9.3 installations
— Joel VanderWerf <joelvanderwerf@...>
2011/11/20
On 11/19/2011 04:55 PM, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#41171] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5653] "I strongly discourage the use of autoload in any standard libraries" (Re: autoload will be dead) — Hiroshi Nakamura <nakahiro@...>
3 messages
2011/11/21
[#41175] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5654][Open] Introduce global lock to avoid concurrent require — Hiroshi Nakamura <nakahiro@...>
12 messages
2011/11/21
[#41186] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5657][Open] Constants in included modules aren't visible when defining classes with Class.new — Gary Bernhardt <gary.bernhardt@...>
5 messages
2011/11/22
[#41211] Availability of ruby/intern.h — Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...>
Are functions accessible via ruby/intern.h considered to be "public"
4 messages
2011/11/22
[#41212] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5662][Open] inject-accumulate, or Haskell's mapAccum* — Edvard Majakari <edvard.majakari@...>
12 messages
2011/11/22
[#41213] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5663][Open] Combined map/select method — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
62 messages
2011/11/22
[#41217] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5663] Combined map/select method
— Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
2011/11/22
[#41294] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5663] Combined map/select method
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/25
[#41391] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5663] Combined map/select method
— Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
2011/11/29
[#45334] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5663] Combined map/select method
— "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>
2012/05/31
[#41256] [ruby-trunk - Feature #2567] Net::HTTP does not handle encoding correctly — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>
3 messages
2011/11/23
[#41262] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5666][Open] Make rb_path2class public — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
6 messages
2011/11/23
[#41302] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5673][Open] undef_method probably doesn't need to raise an error — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
8 messages
2011/11/26
[#41314] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5675][Open] [mingw] static build fails due to socket extension build failure — Jon Forums <redmine@...>
7 messages
2011/11/26
[#41324] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5675][Open] [mingw] static build fails due to socket extension build failure
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/27
> compiling ../../../ext/socket/socket.c
[#41330] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5675][Open] [mingw] static build fails due to socket extension build failure
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/11/27
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:11 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
[#41332] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5675][Open] [mingw] static build fails due to socket extension build failure
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/27
2011/11/27 Luis Lavena <[email protected]>:
[#41321] [Proposal] C API arrangement — Yugui <yugui@...>
Hi, mame-san
4 messages
2011/11/27
[#41336] Wrong encoding of Symbol — Andriy Tyurnikov <andriy.tyurnikov@...>
By default Symbols are encoded as US-ASCII,=20
10 messages
2011/11/27
[#41344] Re: Wrong encoding of Symbol
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/11/28
Hi,
[#41349] Re: Wrong encoding of Symbol
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/11/28
Hi,
[#41353] Re: Wrong encoding of Symbol
— "Michel Demazure" <michel@...>
2011/11/28
Matz wrote :
[#41338] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5677][Open] IO C API — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>
13 messages
2011/11/27
[#41340] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5678][Open] StringIO#to_str — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>
8 messages
2011/11/28
[#41351] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5679][Open] Too many arguments for format warnings on mingw32 build — Heesob Park <phasis@...>
5 messages
2011/11/28
[#41368] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5679][Open] Too many arguments for format warnings on mingw32 build
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/28
> I can see the following warnings during mingw32 build.
[#41370] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5681][Open] Conflcting types for rb_w32_inet_ntop caused by duplicate definition under MinGW — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
7 messages
2011/11/28
[#41373] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5681][Open] Conflcting types for rb_w32_inet_ntop caused by duplicate definition under MinGW
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/11/28
2011/11/28 Luis Lavena <[email protected]>:
[#41404] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5690][Open] Module#qualified_const_get — Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
31 messages
2011/11/30
[#41406] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5690][Open] Module#qualified_const_get
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/11/30
Hi,
[#46001] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5690] Module#qualified_const_get
— "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>
2012/06/30
[#46645] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5690] Module#qualified_const_get
— "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
2012/07/23
[ruby-core:40775] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5534] Redefine Range class and introduce RelativeNumeric and RelativeRange
From:
Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>
Date:
2011-11-06 10:27:18 UTC
List:
ruby-core #40775
Issue #5534 has been updated by Alexey Muranov.
I was not precise, i meant not equality, but *identity* --- that there be only one empty range: Range::EMPTY_SET. Like this:
(2..1) # => Range::EMPTY_SET
This way it would be clear what a range is --- just an infinite set of a certain form, with methods to work with it.
I am in favor of reducing the number of internal attributes of class instances when possible and simplifying their definitions. In my opinion, this should help to understand what a program is doing, to avoid side effects, to write specifications (and hence to maintain existing behavior in future versions), and to settle more easily on desire behavior for new methods.
Mathematically, ranges (2..1) et (3..0) are equal --- both empty, but Ruby remembers their "bounds" and treats them differently.
If my proposed definition of Range is accepted, the questions like the one discussed in #4541 will simply not arise: since the ranges (4..1) and (3..1) will be identical, [1,2,3][3..1] and [1,2,3][4..1] will be giving identical results, whatever the result is.
I propose to view the "memory" of bounds of an empty range as an artifact of implementation of Range , which should not be used for operations like a[1..-2] .
My more general view point is the following: i think it will help to settle on some kind of standards for the language if reasonable relations between different methods are enforced. It is already done in cases where one method uses another, for example Comparable#> , Comparable#< , etc., use #<=> :
a < b if and only if (a <=> b) == -1
I think it would be helpful for understanding the language and coming up with some kind of standards or best practice guidelines if similar relations were imposed between methods that cannot be defined in terms of one another simply because of computer limitations (not being able to loop over infinitely many objects). For example, require in specifications that (unless overridden in a subclass) for two ranges x and y ,
x == y must be true if and only if x.include?(z) == y.include?(z) is true for every possible object z.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5534: Redefine Range class and introduce RelativeNumeric and RelativeRange
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5534
Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee:
Category: core
Target version:
I started by commenting on Feature #4541, but ended up with proposing a new feature myself.
I suggest to redefine the behavior of Range class so that all empty ranges be equal:
(2..1) == (1..-1) and (2..1) == (1...1) and (2..1) == ('z'..'a') # => true
In other fords, ranges `r1` and `r2` should be equal if and only if `r1.include?` and `r2.include?` give identical results for all inputs. (Why is it not `includes?` by the way?) Thus Range would simply be a way to store certain infinite sets.
This change will result in not being able to slice an array `a` from beginning and from the end simultaneously with `a[1..-2]`. To resolve this, i propose to introduce `RelativeNumeric` and `RelativeRange` classes.
Each `RelativeNumeric` would be a `Numeric` with an "anchor", which is an arbitrary symbol. For example:
3.from(:bottom) # would return a "relative" 3 with "anchor" :bottom
One can define shortcuts `#from_bottom` for `#from(:bottom)` and `#from_top` for `#from_top`.
A `RelativeRange` is a range with relative bounds. If bounds of a relative range r are relative to the same anchor and the range is seen to be empty, it should be equal to *the* empty relative range with this anchor. For example:
(3.from(:center)..2.from(:center)) == (0.from(:center)...0.from(:center)) # => true
Now, to do what is currently done by `a[1..-2]`, one can redefine `Array#slice` to use instead:
a[1.from_bottom..(-1).from_top]
What do you think?
--
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org