Activity
From 06/29/2020 to 07/05/2020
07/05/2020
-
11:58 PM Bug #17013: `RubyVM::AbstractSyntaxTree.parse("struct.field += foo")` has no operator
- Thanks! :)
-
03:50 PM Bug #17013 (Closed): `RubyVM::AbstractSyntaxTree.parse("struct.field += foo")` has no operator
-
- ## Summary
`RubyVM::AbstractSyntaxTree.parse("struct.field += foo")` has no operator.
I'm making a tool that uses... -
07:53 PM Bug #17014 (Closed): Range#minmax returns incorrect results on non-numeric exclusive ranges
-
04:42 PM Bug #17014 (Closed): Range#minmax returns incorrect results on non-numeric exclusive ranges
- The implementation of `Range#minmax` added in [d5c60214c45](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/d5c60214c45bafc1cf2a5...
- 04:15 PM Revision efe851a0 (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Version 2.0.1
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/3fa4f2ac67
- 04:15 PM Revision 6a826eb4 (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Return US-ASCII string from BigDecimal#to_s
- Fixes #159
https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/57ee92e700 - 04:15 PM Revision e794d96c (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Drop Ruby 2.3 support
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/79a819d205
- 04:15 PM Revision 40b82afe (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Support Ruby < 2.6
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/61ec452599
- 04:15 PM Revision 03a33603 (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Add Complex#to_d
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/97e794ac97
-
04:15 PM Revision 66072122 (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Make tests pass on Ruby 2.4
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/9d19e842ee
-
- This leaves the default definition, which will raise FrozenError.
https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/05e843d838 - 04:15 PM Revision f00efef3 (git): [ruby/bigdecimal] Support a Complex in Kernel.BigDecimal()
- https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/commit/00795cb01f
-
- Both BigDecimal#clone and BigDecimal#dup return self, there is no
reason to have initialize_copy exposed as a Ruby me... -
-
-
- 03:28 PM Revision 988b4bc9 (git): * 2020-07-06 [ci skip]
-
02:20 PM Bug #16787: [patch] allow Dir.home to work for non-login procs when $HOME not set
- Attaching two separate backport patches, one for branch 'ruby_2_6' and one for branch 'ruby_2_7'.
The changes for ... -
-
-
12:14 PM Bug #17011: BigDecimal .to_s should not use ASCII-8BIT
- How should we proceed to include that fix in CRuby master?
-
10:47 AM Bug #17011: BigDecimal .to_s should not use ASCII-8BIT
- Actually, it's already been fixed upstream: https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/pull/160
Maybe the Ruby spec part o... -
- Sure.
-
- Could you submit this to https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal?
-
- I submitted a PR for it: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/3291
-
03:53 AM Bug #17011 (Closed): BigDecimal .to_s should not use ASCII-8BIT
- `BigDecimal#to_s` returns a `String` in ASCII-8BIT encoding. This is inconvenient in situations where the encoding de...
-
- jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-2:
> Please don't create issues just for backporting if there is an exist... -
-
-
-
08:58 AM Bug #17012: Backport bf1a6771f305ea286a3ae575676924551c03e857
- And c1463625555b061a2b94c3b6c5581730b482a285 too.
-
- This is for backport management.
The issue introduced bf1a6771f305ea286a3ae575676924551c03e857 for [Bug #15807] was ... -
-
-
01:44 AM Revision 95f5fd9a (git): fix up Primitive.cinit! code
- Recent changes break Primitive.cinit!(c_code) so fix it.
07/04/2020
-
11:02 PM Revision e4f7eee0 (git): Check ROBJECT_EMBED on guards-merged ivar access
- Fix CI failure like
http://ci.rvm.jp/results/trunk-mjit-wait@silicon-docker/3043247
introduced by a69dd699ee630dd1086... -
- configure: suppress icc warnings
Every time a pointer to/from VALUE conversion happens, these two
wa... -
-
- I created a pull request for this over on GitHub:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/3287
The integration tests ... -
- The attached patch backports to ruby_2_6 change c15cddd1d515c5bd8dfe8fb2725e3f723aec63b8,
which fixes the issue desc... -
- Please don't create issues just for backporting if there is an existing issue. Just update the Backport field in the...
-
- I created a pull request for this over on GitHub:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/3288
The integration tests ... -
- The attached patch backports to ruby_2_7 change c15cddd1d515c5bd8dfe8fb2725e3f723aec63b8,
which fixes the issue desc... -
-
- FWIW I don't think it was "for Rails" but rather more use cases than that.
I want to note there is also both a per... -
- nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) wrote in #note-8:
> jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-7:
> > No, my proposa... -
- jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-7:
> No, my proposal only affects keyword arguments. `rb_warn_check` is ... - 05:02 PM Revision c4bdb642 (git): * 2020-07-05 [ci skip]
-
- The implementation of Range#minmax added in d5c60214c45 causes the
following incorrect behaviour:
('a'...'c').minm... -
-
- Primitve.cexpr! and .cstmt! can access Ruby's parameter and
*local variables* (note that local parameters are also lo... -
07:51 AM Feature #17006: Let `Kernel#Hash` take a block to provide the default value
- nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote in #note-2:
> The description mentions the default value first, but the proposal will ... -
- The description mentions the default value first, but the proposal will solve the default proc only.
-
04:41 AM Revision 7a5da7d5 (git): Allow hidden files with a hyphen to be source controlled
- Latest bundler includes a file named `.gitlab-ci.yml.tt`. Because of
this too specific .gitignore entry, it was faili... -
- * Make Kernel#then, #yield_self, #frozen? builtin
* Fix test_jit -
- when an ISeq has multiple ivar accesses.
07/03/2020
-
08:29 PM Bug #17008: JIT enabled on Windows can cause constant conhost pop-ups
- k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun) wrote in #note-1:
> I have my own MinGW environment, but I've never observed such a behavi... -
- I have my own MinGW environment, but I've never observed such a behavior. Could you provide at least one way to repro...
-
- I'm unsure of the min requirements for it to happen, but at least for ruby embedded in a gui mingw32 application, ena...
- 04:52 PM Revision ccb2e6ea (git): * 2020-07-04 [ci skip]
-
- * Rewrite Kernel#tap with Ruby
This was good for VM too, but of course my intention is to unblock JIT's inlining of ... -
02:49 PM Revision e8010c74 (git): Enhanced RDoc for Array (#3276)
- *Methods:
keep_if
delete
delete_at
slice! -
01:31 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- the problem i have with that is that each time it creates a (cached) struct class.
after taking so long to make fr... -
10:52 AM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- Hello, this is a great idea. I would just love to have this feature in Ruby, so I thought I may provide some helpful ...
-
- ```ruby
class C
def foo
["C"]
end
end
refinement = Module.new do
R = refine C do
def foo
... -
- Sometimes, we need to create a hash that has explicit key-value pairs as well as a default value, but there has not b...
-
- Use ID instead of GENTRY for gvars.
Global variables are compiled into GENTRY (a pointer to struct
rb_global_entry).... -
- * RUBY_DEBUG_LOG: Logging debug information mechanism
This feature provides a mechanism to store logging information... -
06:16 AM Revision 01776ca1 (git): Ignore conftest.c under the ext directories for CodeQL analysis
-
02:47 AM Revision 1e039474 (git): test/json/json_fixtures_test.rb: Prevent an "out of range" warning
- ```
/home/mame/work/ruby/.ext/common/json/common.rb:263: warning: Float 23456789012E666 out of range
``` - 02:27 AM Revision 05a12297 (git): * 2020-07-03 [ci skip]
-
07/02/2020
-
11:14 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- Accessing object methods via dots is more convenient than via brackets. And I tend to think of `{a: 1, b: 2}` as of o...
-
08:56 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- Without expressing an opinion on the proposal (yet), I'd like to point an easy way to avoid having to use `fetch` all...
-
- > klass.new(**kwargs).freeze
This proposal doesn't include `freeze`.
I agree it is one option, but need a discu... -
- > it was "almost the same" - what differences are there?
The actual implementation is more like this:
```ruby
... -
04:06 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- I'm also +1 for this. The utility of such a feature is obvious and would improve a lot of Ruby code both in readabili...
-
11:34 AM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- +1 for the idea, I'm using my_hash.fetch(:my_key) to ensure consistency in a lot of places.
Concerns:
1. Struct... -
i think this is more of a confusing feature
IF `${a: 1, b: 2}` is like `Struct.new(:a, :b).new(1, 2)` then my gu...-
- marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) wrote in #note-19:
> jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-13:
> > Due to Seq... -
- jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-13:
> Due to Sequel::Dataset#insert's flexible API, it would be hard to s... -
- Agreed as well on the point of "if I observe it with `p/puts/IRB` I don't want the method call to behave differently....
-
04:45 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-16:
> soulcutter (Bradley Schaefer) wrote in #note-15:
> > Also, how wou... -
- soulcutter (Bradley Schaefer) wrote in #note-15:
> Also, how would you test this behavior?
```ruby
# return valu... -
- jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-13:
> ```ruby
> def foo(**kw)
> kw.merge(FORCE_VALUES)
> b... -
05:31 AM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- Re: other languages with similar concepts.
- Perl has `wantarray`. In spite of its name, the intrinsic can be use... -
- duerst (Martin Dürst) wrote in #note-12:
> - Where there are performance implications, couldn't that be solved by an... -
12:18 AM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- Additional questions:
- Are there any other languages that have such a feature?
- Where there are performance impli... -
04:31 PM Bug #16853: calling bla(hash, **kw) with a string-based hash passes the strings into **kw (worked < 2.7)
- > > The reason why it was changed is because there are some methods that want to accept both symbol and non-symbol ke...
-
01:55 PM Bug #16853: calling bla(hash, **kw) with a string-based hash passes the strings into **kw (worked < 2.7)
- Hi Yusuke. Thanks for the long thought-out answer. I really appreciate you taking the time.
> But the behavior was... -
-
- Thank you for your survey. Seems fine!
- 05:34 AM Revision 08ba5bec (git): * 2020-07-02 [ci skip]
-
- This changeset changes for instance Integer#integer? from:
== disasm: #<ISeq:to_i@<internal:integer>:66 (66,2)-(... -
- nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) wrote in #note-6:
> jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote in #note-4:
> > An alternative... -
- mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote in #note-3:
> Let me confirm: what do you mean "dependent"?
I'm sorry, I just misspelled i...
07/01/2020
-
- Are there examples (for example from known gems) where this would actually be useful?
-
05:04 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- The more I think about this, the more it concerns me. If there is some library code like this:
``` ruby
def do_s... -
05:02 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- > I'd see an explicit caution such as "DO NOT ABUSE THIS!" in its document.
It will definitely be abused.
I do ... -
04:52 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- I will add that although I can see the same potential problem with the C api I am less concerned it will lead to the ...
-
- Reposted from github issue:
"Having only thought about this for about half an hour I am concerned with this feature.... -
- As an example, I don't think using such a manual optimization in OptCarrot (default mode) would be appropriate (it wo...
-
- What Jeremy said, so in short RubyVM is not a good place for this because it's CRuby-specific (ExperimentalFeatures o...
-
- My first impression is that this is a very bad tool to change method behavior depending upon its caller context. How...
-
- I can see definite performance advantages to this in my libraries (specifically Sequel). Knowing that the return val...
-
- In `rb_whether_the_return_value_is_used_p` I believe `whether_the` is redundant with `p`. `is` also seems unnecessary...
-
- In ruby, it often is the case for a method's return value to not be used by its caller. Even when a method returns s...
-
- Looks like an issue with the gssapi gem and not Ruby. There is an issue on the gssapi repository that looks the same...
-
07:51 PM Bug #17005: lib_gssapi.rb:182: [BUG] Segmentation fault at 0x000000000000004d
- In case it is of any use:
```
Alberts-MacBook-Pro:dcache_deploy arossi$ /opt/puppetlabs/bolt/bin/gem list | grep ... -
- I am running Bolt from a MacBook Pro (mid-2014) with Mojave 10.14.6.
My organization requires us to use kerberized... -
- > This also makes it easier to turn on keyword warnings (-w vs -W:keyword_deprecated). The downside is it also turns ...
-
- An alternative approach to adding `Warning[:keyword_deprecated]` that would be easier to implement in 2.7 and would n...
-
- nagachika-san, thank you for your reply!
nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) wrote in #note-2:
> I worried about a kin... -
- I understand the pain point discussion of warning for the 3.0 keyword arguments, and I agree to turn off the warning ...
-
- I chatted with @tenderlovemaking a bit about this.
I did some research as well and my reading of this "extra" meta... -
- When rationalizing negative values.
-
-
-
- 09:51 AM Revision 68d7e93b (git): * 2020-07-01 [ci skip]
-
- 09:47 AM Revision 26041da2 (git): [flori/json] Typo fix
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/26c1769969
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/ee5b6a74e9
-
09:47 AM Revision cb3e6251 (git): [flori/json] Use frozen string for hash key
- When use non-frozen string for hash key with `rb_hash_aset()`, it will duplicate and freeze it internally.
To avoid d... -
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/ada48f0236
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/470d909c0d
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/7bee2c7c13
- 09:47 AM Revision fe10323a (git): [flori/json] Fix test that wasn't testing anything
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/d5c6566b41
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/e7e3732130
-
- About a month ago, we got a segfault on Windows while running bundler specs in CI.
I'm posting the log here in cas...
06/30/2020
-
- Hi,
I would like to extend heap pages to be exactly 16KiB. Currently, `struct heap_page_body` is 16KiB - `(sizeof... -
- ### Use case
When you need to recusrsively scan a directory, you either have to use `Dir[]` / `Dir.glob`, which is... -
- I understand (and also had to feel) the pain points. I can't imagine what this would have been with duplication warni...
-
- Matz has decided to disable deprecation warnings for 3.0 keyword separation by default because many users feel them n...
-
-
-
-
-
10:03 AM Revision 7cb8904a (git): Extract correct processor name for ARM64 Macs
- 08:14 AM Revision 15a312ed (git): * 2020-06-30 [ci skip]
-
08:13 AM Revision eefc2d8a (git): Fix a typo [ci skip]
-
07:13 AM Feature #16984: Remove write barrier exemption for T_ICLASS
- > Could you measure the memory/objects consumption before and after this patch if it is not difficult?
I took meas... -
06/29/2020
-
01:49 PM Bug #16988: Kernel.load loads file from current directory without '.' in path
- nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) wrote in #note-1:
> I don’t this is an implementation bug, but a documentation issue.
Sho... -
- To build with latest Bison 3.5, the following commits are needed.
### for [2.7]:
* `8e694129305a3978313cf4bcd463c... -
- Thank you for your notice and providing the patch. I will take a look into it.
-
04:25 AM Revision 3621a7de (git): Avoid deprecated OpenSSL::Digest constants
-
- This reverts commit c8dc2bf1401fc01d35a4a7587ed224f1f2fe29e6.
No longer necessary. -
- (I was not aware of this because I use clang, but) it seems gcc cannot
detect reachablility of this point. It render... - 02:06 AM Revision 1020e120 (git): * 2020-06-29 [ci skip]
-
- Reduce goto by splitting the function.
-
- Nobu likes this arrangement.
-
-
- Not every compilers understand that rb_raise does not return. When a
function does not end with a return statement, ... -
- Prevent casual typos inside of UNREACHABLE_RETURN(...).
-
-
- The rb_exc_new3() result is already ready to be returned. No need to
fall through the switch. -
- Found that `if (builtin_class_name) { printf } else { printf }` happens
twice. It would be better if we could elimin... -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
-
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
-
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
-
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- This macro does not improve any readability and/or runtime performance.
-
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- Was this an autogenerated function? This tendency of avoiding empty
branches are no longer preserved (see for instan... -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
-
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor. -
- I'm not necessarily against every goto in general, but jumping into a
branch is definitely a bad idea. Better refactor.
Also available in: Atom