[#59462] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9342][Open] [PATCH] SizedQueue#clear does not notify waiting threads in Ruby 1.9.3 — "jsc (Justin Collins)" <redmine@...>

9 messages 2014/01/02

[#59466] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9343][Open] [PATCH] SizedQueue#max= wakes up waiters properly — "normalperson (Eric Wong)" <normalperson@...>

11 messages 2014/01/02

[#59498] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9352][Open] [BUG] rb_sys_fail_str(connect(2) for [fe80::1%lo0]:3000) - errno == 0 — "kain (Claudio Poli)" <claudio@...>

10 messages 2014/01/03

[#59516] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9356][Open] TCPSocket.new does not seem to handle INTR — "charliesome (Charlie Somerville)" <charliesome@...>

48 messages 2014/01/03

[#59538] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — "shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe)" <shyouhei@...>

33 messages 2014/01/03
[#59541] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2014/01/04

Hi, I noticed a trivial typo in array.c, and it fails building struct.c

[#59582] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2014/01/06

Intersting challenge.

[#59583] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9367][Open] REXML::XmlDecl doesn't use user specified quotes — "bearmini (Takashi Oguma)" <bear.mini@...>

12 messages 2014/01/06

[#59642] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9384][Open] Segfault in ruby 2.1.0p0 — "cbliard (Christophe Bliard)" <christophe.bliard@...>

11 messages 2014/01/08

[#59791] About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

A while ago I created a proof-of-concept that I intended to use in my

16 messages 2014/01/15
[#59794] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Eric Hodel <[email protected]> 2014/01/15

On 15 Jan 2014, at 11:58, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <[email protected]> =

[#59808] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...> 2014/01/16

Em 15-01-2014 19:42, Eric Hodel escreveu:

[#59810] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Eric Hodel <[email protected]> 2014/01/16

On 16 Jan 2014, at 02:15, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <[email protected]> =

[#59826] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...> 2014/01/17

Em 16-01-2014 19:43, Eric Hodel escreveu:

[#59832] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Eric Hodel <[email protected]> 2014/01/17

On 17 Jan 2014, at 04:22, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <[email protected]> =

[ruby-core:59623] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #9321] rb_mod_const_missing does not generate a c-return event

From: SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Date: 2014-01-07 09:01:38 UTC
List: ruby-core #59623
(2014/01/03 3:19), drkaes (Stefan Kaes) wrote:
> @ko1: Why do you think the second patch creates a performance problem?
> 
> Module#const_missing is an exceptional case. Am I missing something?

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

Let me clarify the spec.

###
n = 0
TracePoint.new(){|tp|
  next if tp.event == :line
  case tp.event.to_s
  when /call/
    puts "#{' ' * 2 * n}#{tp.inspect}"
    n+=1
  when /return/
    n-=1 if n>0
    puts "#{' ' * 2 * n}#{tp.inspect}"
  else
    puts "#{' ' * 2 * n}#{tp.inspect}"
  end
}.enable

def f
  Object::XYZZY #=> const_missing
end

f
__END__
#=>

current behavior:

#<TracePoint:c_return `enable'@test.rb:15>
#<TracePoint:c_call `method_added'@test.rb:17>
#<TracePoint:c_return `method_added'@test.rb:17>
#<TracePoint:call `f'@test.rb:17>
  #<TracePoint:c_call `const_missing'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_call `initialize'@test.rb:18>
      #<TracePoint:c_call `initialize'@test.rb:18>
      #<TracePoint:c_return `initialize'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_return `initialize'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_call `exception'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_return `exception'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_call `backtrace'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_return `backtrace'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:[email protected]:18>
  #<TracePoint:return `f'@test.rb:18>

expected behavior:

#<TracePoint:c_return `enable'@test.rb:15>
#<TracePoint:c_call `method_added'@test.rb:17>
#<TracePoint:c_return `method_added'@test.rb:17>
#<TracePoint:call `f'@test.rb:17>
  #<TracePoint:c_call `const_missing'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_return `const_missing'@test.rb:18> <-- NEW!
  #<TracePoint:c_call `initialize'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_call `initialize'@test.rb:18>
    #<TracePoint:c_return `initialize'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_return `initialize'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_call `exception'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_return `exception'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_call `backtrace'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:c_return `backtrace'@test.rb:18>
  #<TracePoint:[email protected]:18>
#<TracePoint:return `f'@test.rb:18>


is it right?

This behavior is similar to "raise" behavior.

-- 
// SASADA Koichi at atdot dot net

In This Thread