Activity
From 06/25/2020 to 07/01/2020
07/01/2020
-
11:42 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- 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_something_and_return_report
something = do_something
if RubyVM.return_value_used?
create_report(something)
... -
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 not think this should be exposed to user code in any way. If you want a method to either return a result or not dependin... -
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 same problems I outlined in Core MRI code.
-
- Reposted from github issue:
"Having only thought about this for about half an hour I am concerned with this feature. Will this lead to people writing APIs where the users of that API need to worry about whether they are assigning the me... -
04:14 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- As an example, I don't think using such a manual optimization in OptCarrot (default mode) would be appropriate (it would feel like a hack).
-
- What Jeremy said, so in short RubyVM is not a good place for this because it's CRuby-specific (ExperimentalFeatures or Kernel would be OK IMHO).
Do you have measurements on real applications, not just micro-benchmarks?
The masgn ca... -
04:02 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- My first impression is that this is a very bad tool to change method behavior depending upon its caller context. However, my second consideration is that such a bad thing is already possible by some ways like `Kernel#caller`. So I'm ne...
-
03:42 PM Feature #17004: Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- I can see definite performance advantages to this in my libraries (specifically Sequel). Knowing that the return value is not used can save expensive database queries to determine what the return value should be.
I think it may be be... -
- In `rb_whether_the_return_value_is_used_p` I believe `whether_the` is redundant with `p`. `is` also seems unnecessary here, so perhaps `rb_return_value_used_p` and `return_value_used?` are good enough?
There is a possible concern if thi... -
09:24 AM Feature #17004 (Open): Provide a way for methods to omit their return value
- 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 something meaningful, its caller is free to ignore it.
Why not provide a way for a method to know if its return value ... -
- Looks like an issue with the gssapi gem and not Ruby. There is an issue on the gssapi repository that looks the same:
https://github.com/zenchild/gssapi/issues/12
The issue was closed but I guess no fix: https://github.com/zench... -
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 krb
net-ssh-krb (0.5.1)
```
```
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 ssh to contact internal nodes.
Here are the ruby/gem versions packaged with this version of puppet-bolt:
```
/o... -
05:36 PM Feature #17000: 2.7.2 turns off deprecation warnings by default
- > This also makes it easier to turn on keyword warnings (-w vs -W:keyword_deprecated). The downside is it also turns on other verbose warnings, which the user may not be interested in.
Yes, that would be a big problem for us. We hook ... -
- An alternative approach to adding `Warning[:keyword_deprecated]` that would be easier to implement in 2.7 and would not require changes to master would be only printing keyword argument warnings in verbose mode. This should be a one-lin...
-
- nagachika-san, thank you for your reply!
nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) wrote in #note-2:
> I worried about a kind of discontinuity of the some deprecation warnings.
I agree that it is best to disable only keyword-related warnings... -
12:34 PM Feature #17000: 2.7.2 turns off deprecation warnings by default
- I understand the pain point discussion of warning for the 3.0 keyword arguments, and I agree to turn off the warning for keyword arguments in ruby_2_7 branch.
But the proposed changesets in the pull request https://github.com/ruby/rub... -
- I chatted with @tenderlovemaking a bit about this.
I did some research as well and my reading of this "extra" metadata from malloc seems to indicate that you really should not assumptions about it being in a specific place, or a speci... -
01:41 PM Revision 49029811 (git): Reduced working `Rational` object allocations
- When rationalizing negative values.
-
-
-
- 09:51 AM Revision 68d7e93b (git): * 2020-07-01 [ci skip]
-
09:50 AM Revision 0aac138e (git): Merge json-2.3.1 from flori/json
- 09:47 AM Revision 26041da2 (git): [flori/json] Typo fix
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/26c1769969
-
09:47 AM Revision d69b55ac (git): [flori/json] Added :call-seq: to RDOc for some methods
- 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 duplicate and freeze, this patch will give a frozen string in `rb_hash_aset()`.
```
Warming up -------------------------... -
- 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
-
08:41 AM Bug #17003 (Closed): Segfault during bundler specs on Windows
- About a month ago, we got a segfault on Windows while running bundler specs in CI.
I'm posting the log here in case there's something obvious in there that needs fixing.
```
Failures:
1) [TEST_ENV_NUMBER=1] bundle add with --...
06/30/2020
-
- Hi,
I would like to extend heap pages to be exactly 16KiB. Currently, `struct heap_page_body` is 16KiB - `(sizeof(size_t) * 5)`.
Before I list the reasons I want to change, there are two important facts I want to list. First, OS ... -
- ### Use case
When you need to recusrsively scan a directory, you either have to use `Dir[]` / `Dir.glob`, which is fine for small directories or simple patterns,
but can easily take several seconds to complete for large repositories ... -
- I understand (and also had to feel) the pain points. I can't imagine what this would have been with duplication warnings https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16289...
IIUC the proposal is basically to have "-W:no-deprecated" by default, ... -
- Matz has decided to disable deprecation warnings for 3.0 keyword separation by default because many users feel them noisy and painful rather than useful. See https://discuss.rubyonrails.org/t/new-2-7-3-0-keyword-argument-pain-point/7498...
-
-
-
-
-
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 measurements on app B. It's a large Rails app with lots of classes and modules.
The amount of retained memory is not determ... -
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.
Shouldn't behavior be consistent with require, though? -
- To build with latest Bison 3.5, the following commits are needed.
### for [2.7]:
* `8e694129305a3978313cf4bcd463c6aa2ba9ceb4`
* `47720e2255f34ecad49763c66a7ea02a55a3f60a` (commit log has a typo)
### for [2.6] and [2.5], preceding... -
- 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 renders an unused variable
warning, which is a false positive. Let us suppress the compiler.
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/ru... - 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, such compilers can issue
warnings. We would better tell them about reachabilities. -
- 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 eliminate those if statements. -
- 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 instance NODE_IVAR). Let's
just delete those unnecessary jumps into branches. -
- 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.
06/28/2020
-
07:07 PM Bug #16510: irb crashes when hitting 'Home' or 'End' keys
- I noticed this issue when I connect to my Ubuntu 20.04 server and I press Home or End in the Rails console. This is a new issue introduced with Ruby 2.7.0.
I was using the macOS terminal and I had the Home key mapped to `\033[H` and the... -
-
-
- To suppress warnings by Visual C.
```
./integer.rb(5) : warning C4129: 'i' : unrecognized character escape sequence
./kernel.rb(21) : warning C4129: 'k' : unrecognized character escape sequence
``` -
- Define `Fiddle::TYPE_VARIADIC` only when `ffi_prep_cif_var` is
available, otherwise skip the test for it.
06/27/2020
-
09:26 PM Bug #16997 (Open): IO#gets converts some \r\n to \n with universal_newline: false
- Reproduction code:
```
IO.binwrite "t.csv", ("a" * 100 + "\r\n") * 100
File.open("t.csv", encoding: "BOM|UTF-8", universal_newline: false) do |input|
p input.gets(nil, 32 * 1024) # => "a...a\n...\na...a\r\n...\r\n"
end
```
It ... -
07:12 PM Feature #16984: Remove write barrier exemption for T_ICLASS
- Thank you for great work. This kind of hack can cause BUGs easily.
> Private app A's heap size is about 22 MiB compared to B's 250 MiB.
Could you measure the memory/objects consumption before and after this patch if it is not diffi... -
06:31 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- First of all, this is super cool idea!
I do have habit to use hash since it is seems to be elegant (as described in original proposal background section) and I end up having problems later (since I need to use fetch everywhere to get ... -
- Other syntax ideas, by others:
* Other prefixes
* `::{a: 1}`
* `\{a: 1}`
* `<>` to indicate
* `{<> a:1}` for anonymous Struct.
* `{<A> a:1}` for named Struct, the name is `A`.
* Similar with `%`
* `{% a:1}` for anonymous Struc... -
- # Q&A
## Splat like Hash literal and method arguments
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16986#note-3
> I was wondering if ${} can do the following things compared to Hash literals:
Not allowed because of vulnerability concerns (please... -
02:28 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- I like the idea of being able to quickly create an anonymous Struct but am concerned about the use of `$` for the syntax since that hinders readability and causes confusion due to `$` generally denoting a *global variable*. Why not allow...
-
12:37 PM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- `struct = (a: 1, b: 2)` would be a great syntax, because I think anonymous struct is something like Tuple of Python.
But, there are two problems:
1. `()` returns `nil`, not an empty struct.
2. The meaning of `p(a: 1)` and `p (a: 1)... -
05:07 PM Revision 0703e014 (git): Mark some Integer methods as inline (#3264)
- 05:03 PM Revision 247dd874 (git): * 2020-06-28 [ci skip]
-
- Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) wrote in #note-2:
> Shouldn't the rehash be tied to a change in the number of buckets rather than which method is used?
> ...
I think you might be confusing the re-organizing of a Hash's internal structure into... -
04:00 PM Bug #16996: Hash should avoid doing unnecessary rehash
- Very surprising results for `Hash#dup`. I even tried `h.rehash` before the benchmark, with no effect.
Shouldn't the rehash be tied to a change in the number of buckets rather than which method is used?
`select{true}` doesn't change t... -
- Completely agreed, `Hash#dup` should not rehash (and it already doesn't on TruffleRuby).
-
- Pop quiz: Which is the fastest way to get a copy of a Hash `h`?
If, like me, you thought `h.dup` (of course, right?), you are actually wrong.
The fastest way is to call `h.merge`. Try it:
```
require 'benchmark/ips'
lengths ... -
- If no installed libffi found, use bundled libffi unless explicitly
`--disable-bundled-libffi` option is given. - 02:54 PM Revision f2bcdc72 (git): [ruby/fiddle] Support MSWIN (#43)
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/f16e7ff6e0
- 02:54 PM Revision a40b390b (git): [ruby/fiddle] test windows: use _snprintf
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/aa261bdb9f
- 02:54 PM Revision 6429b6d9 (git): [ruby/fiddle] Add missing include
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/4ca61efcd7
- 02:54 PM Revision ae18220f (git): [ruby/fiddle] Add support for variadic arguments
- GitHub: fix GH-39
Reported by kojix2. Thanks!!!
https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/6c4cb904dc - 02:54 PM Revision 9f740aca (git): [ruby/fiddle] Use meaningful variable name
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/2cac24b7c8
- 02:54 PM Revision 50fbd00e (git): [ruby/fiddle] Use "do { } while (0)" to ensure requiring ";"
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/2155ae5979
-
-
-
-
-
09:14 AM Feature #16812: Allow slicing arrays with ArithmeticSequence
- > But a negative start with a non-negative end is quite weird. What is that operation even supposed to mean? What is it useful for?
I believe such edge cases might emerge not being directly written, but when dynamically calculated. Im... -
- sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada) wrote in #note-2:
> Would
> ...
It will definitely work, but it will be the same as `Set.new(h.keys)` (a bit slower because enumerator is a bit slow). It still iterates on the keys, and add them to the new hash.
... -
01:55 AM Feature #16993: Sets: from hash keys using Hash#key_set
- Would
```ruby
Set.new(h.each_key)
```
not work? -
- This reverts commit 5c03e4680e724faeedb2c5fc1581d5fcb66aaff2.
I gave up stabilizing Rinda::TupleSpaceProxyTest#test_cancel_02. As the
test uses sleep, it's probably not gonna be stable with --jit-wait.
http://ci.rvm.jp/results/trunk-mj... -
04:53 AM Revision 600f3990 (git): Cosmetic change
-
-
04:51 AM Revision c9ee34a1 (git): Add #deconstruct cache to find pattern
-
-
-
- ruby_2_7 799c5766a4dc215d139d2c26ac68636f43a64fbf merged revision(s) a19228f878d955eaf2cce086bcf53f46fdf894b9.
-
- Closed to backport.
-
- brace the fact that lchmod(2) can EOPNOTSUPP
Musl libc has this function as a tiny wrapper of fchmodat(3posix). On
the other hand Linux kernel does not support changing modes of a symlink.
The operation always f... -
- ruby_2_7 d8a32b146561a0ddd3e60da9863a082b7e7725db merged revision(s) 263b941321c3de6afc8f9dafbc2625f866b7437e.
-
- [ripper] fix mismatched indentations warning [Bug #16981]
The scanner location has to be set from `lex.ptok` before it is
flushed by dispatching the scanner event. -
-
- I don’t this is an implementation bug, but a documentation issue.
- 01:55 AM Revision d6c9c014 (git): * 2020-06-27 [ci skip]
-
-
- Moved this hack mark to an argument to `compile_hash`.
> Bad Hack: temporarily mark hash node with flag so
> compile_hash can compile call differently.
06/26/2020
-
- This is quite minor, but `Set#<=>` should be refined.
Reminder: `Set` defines `<`, `>`, etc. as inclusion, but does not have a corresponding `<=>`:
```ruby
Set[1] < Set[1, 2] # => true
Set[1] <=> Set[1, 2] # => nil, should be -1
... -
- I would like a shorthand syntax for *frozen Sets of symbols or of strings*.
I am thinking of:
```ruby
%ws{hello world} # => Set['hello', 'world'].freeze
%is{hello world} # => Set[:hello, :world].freeze
```
The individual stri... -
- To create a set from hash keys currently implies a temporary array for all keys, rehashing all those keys and rebuilding a hash. Instead, the hash could be copied and its values set to `true`.
```ruby
h = {a: 1}
# Now:
Set.new(h.ke... -
- Officially, set elements have uncertain order. This predades when Hash started being ordered (Ruby 1.9.0, Xmas 2007). Sets have since been de-facto insertion-ordered. FYI, in those 13 years, there have been about 70 commits to `lib/set.r...
-
- I'd like to add `#join` to `Set`:
```ruby
# Now:
Set[1, 2, 3].join('x') # => NoMethodError
# After
Set[1, 2, 3].join('x') # => "1x2x3"
```
I'd make this join never recursive. (I've never wanted to use the recursivity of `Array... -
- We currently have `set <operator> array` work fine:
```ruby
Set[1] + [2] # => Set[1, 2]
```
Nothing works in the reverse order:
```ruby
[1] + Set[2] # => no implicit conversion of Set into Array
# should be:
[1] + Set[2] # ... -
- I am opening a series of feature requests on `Set`, all of them based on this usecase.
The main usecase I have in mind is my recent experience with `RuboCop`. I noticed a big number of frozen arrays being used only to later call `incl... -
- mrkn (Kenta Murata) wrote in #note-7:
> It may be better to change the behavior of `[*0..10][-100..100]`
I somewhat agree with that. When using range slicing most combinations make sense:
```ruby
[*0..10][0..4] #first elements
... -
- Ruby allows to load files using ```Kernel.load``` without explicitly specifying the relative path with ```.``` I'm not sure it's a bug or a feature, but since documentation in master doesn't say anything about it and the behavior differs...
-
- Thinking a bit more about it, I see more of a conceptual problem.
Introducing new literal in a language, we kinda introduce a new concept of the core collection. But what's that collection is, how'd you explain it to a novice?
It i... -
- > Or yeah just a simple Struct() or Struct[] with no additional syntax as suggested just above.
Actually I just realized that it can't really work as it would allow for `**kwargs`. -
- > Matz said he thought about {|a: 1, b: 2 |} syntax.
Might be just me but `{|` on first sight makes me think: this is a block.
What about a `%` syntax? `%s` and `%S` already exists, but `%O` could make sense: `%O{foo: 1, bar: 42}`.... -
- Another (unrelated, but conflicting) matter: I am not sure we have/had a discussion for this, but I remember Bozhidar Batsov in his "Ruby 4: To Infinity and Beyond" proposed `${}` as a literal for *set* (which for me seems more important...
-
- WDYT about half-solution (without syntax change)?
E.g. for me, the problem with `Struct.new(:a, :b).new(1, 2)` is not that it is "too long to write" but just that it is looks "hacky" (like, "you are using Struct against its expectation... -
10:09 AM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- hi, I like this idea :)
I was wondering if `${}` can do the following things compared to Hash literals:
```ruby
# Can a value that is not a Symbol be used as a key (Symbol only?)
${ "a" => 1 }
${ 1 => 1 }
# Can variables be use... -
09:36 AM Feature #16986: Anonymous Struct literal
- First, I like the idea, so +1 for the idea. It also reminds me of
a more "prototypic-based approach" in general with structs, so if
the syntax could be made simpler to type, that seems to be a
possible improvement. And it fits into othe... -
- # Abstract
How about introducing anonymous Struct literal such as `${a: 1, b: 2}`?
It is almost the same as `Struct.new(:a, :b).new(1, 2)`.
# Proposal
## Background
In many cases, people use hash objects to represent a set o... -
- Since it's an error in 3.0, shouldn't it be made a non-verbose warning in 2.7?
-
- sam.saffron (Sam Saffron) wrote in #note-28:
> If we keep `foo(a: 1)` working a developer may get confused (despite everything operating 100% correctly):
> ...
I feel compelled to make a quick note here that what Sam is saying above is... -
- Enumerations are designed to be greedy (immediately executed on each method call within a chain) by default. Sometimes, that is not useful for practical purposes (e.g. 2 mln strings array, drop comments, split into fields, find the first...
-
- That's interesting...
My understanding was that the "find" and "load" operations were supposed to be orthogonal, so that we could have e.g.
1. find in:
* directory
* gems (cache)
* zip file
2. load:
* .rb
* .so
... -
- To add an "opinion perspective"... I, for one, even if not fascinated but at least intrigued by new syntax.
My reasoning is as follows:
* The most precious Ruby's quality for me is "expressiveness at the level of the single 'phrase... -
- I don't have any big preference, but I tend to agree with sawa too.
When I first read the proposal, I was confused in that two suggestions seem to be combined - or at the least I was reading it that way.
(1) Display "foo: bar" rather t... -
07:58 AM Feature #16985: Improve `pp` for `Hash` and `String`
- I wish the hashrocket stays and the syntax is consistent without exceptions for symbol.
-
- shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) wrote in #note-4:
> There are lots of debatable points on String#inspect (for instance its return value depends on runtime locale, why?). Improving it can quite easily jump into a bikeshed. You might want to s... -
- There are lots of debatable points on String#inspect (for instance its return value depends on runtime locale, why?). Improving it can quite easily jump into a bikeshed. You might want to separate Hash's and String's discussions and fo...
-
- For `String`, I meant to say that current format would be kept the same except if the single quote version exist and has no escape.
```ruby
pp "Hello" # => "Hello" (no change)
pp "Won't\nwork \"Marc-André\"" # => "Won't\nwork \"Marc-And... -
-
- asked by ko1 to put this.
-
- and a related VM improvement.
JIT related commits:
* Code size reduction
* Deduplicate functions on JIT compaction 818d6d33368a396d9cd3d1a34a84015a9e76c5c8
* Avoid always inlining cold paths of ivar fcd257629063a345c48ff2d8057fa8ab... -
- https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/a09e66adf4
https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/6cab9b45d6
https://github.com/ruby/fiddle/commit/ab72b19bed -
- and add a debug log
-
- for opt_* insns.
opt_eq handles rb_obj_equal inside opt_eq, and all other cfunc is
handled by opt_send_without_block. Therefore we can't decide which insn
should be generated by checking whether it's cfunc cc or not.
```
$ benchmark-dr... -
- to make sure :opt_invokebuiltin_delegate_leave doesn't become
:(trace_)opt_invokebuiltin_delegate.
This is to prevent a warning like
> /tmp/ruby/v3/src/trunk-test/test/ruby/test_jit.rb:618: warning:
'opt_invokebuiltin_delegate_leave' in... -
- http://rubyci.s3.amazonaws.com/ubuntu2004/ruby-master/log/20200626T033003Z.log.html.gz
```
/home/chkbuild/chkbuild/tmp/build/20200626T033003Z/ruby/test/ruby/test_settracefunc.rb:2299: warning: ambiguous first argument; put parentheses or... -
- To prevent random failure with --jit-wait like
http://ci.rvm.jp/results/trunk-mjit-wait@silicon-docker/3026615 -
- If :return event is specified for a opt_invokebuiltin_delegate_leave
and leave combination, the instructions should be
opt_invokebuiltin_delegate
trace_return
instructions. To make it, opt_invokebuiltin_delegate_leave
instruction wil...
06/25/2020
-
- Eregon (Benoit Daloze) wrote in #note-23:
> Noteworthy is the current syntax in trunk is `def name(*args) = expr` (and not `def: name`), so there is *no* visual cue that this is a endless method definition except the `=` which comes ver... -
- Noteworthy is the current syntax in trunk is `def name(*args) = expr` (and not `def: name`), so there is *no* visual cue that this is a endless method definition except the `=` which comes very late.
I agree with @marcandre, I think it ... -
- tldnr; I am against this proposal, it decreases readability, increases complexity and doesn't bring anything to the table (in that order)
I read the thread carefully and couldn't find a statement of what is the intended gain.
@matz, co... -
- I think `symbol_key: value` would be nice in Hash#inspect, even if there are also non-Symbol keys.
I think changing String#inspect might be confusing, I'm used to see Strings always starting with a `"` for `p string`. -
- Could we improve `pp` for `Hash` and `String`:
```ruby
pp({hello: 'My name is "Marc-André"'})
# =>
{hello: 'My name is "Marc-André"'}
# instead of
{:hello=>"My name is \"Marc-André\""}
```
If any key is non-symbol, they woul... -
06:23 PM Feature #16147: List Comprehensions in Ruby
- In my opinion, the more useful types of list comprehensions are when multiple inputs are needed.
The Ruby syntax in example one looks best, but requires more array manipulation, even if Enumerable#filter_map replaces select.map. Example... - 03:21 PM Revision 289a28e6 (git): * 2020-06-26 [ci skip]
- 03:21 PM Revision 2d89af45 (git): Add require to Delegator examples
- In Ruby 2.7.1 SimpeDelegator cannot be used without requiring `delegate` this PR adds the require to the first example for each class so that devs don't have to hunt for what require to use.
-
- Digging a bit into this issue, I was wrong that this is just s390x.
~~~
for i in {1..10000}
do
echo "******** $i"
make runruby TESTRUN_SCRIPT="-Itool/lib test/-ext-/bug_reporter/test_bug_reporter.rb -v"
done
... snip ...... -
- While `spec/bundler` and `spec/bundler/` are treated different
targets by GNU make 4, the same target by GNU make 3. The latter
target, ending with a slash, was to run `test-bundler-parallel`,
instead of `spec/bundler/%`. -
08:09 AM Feature #16897: General purpose memoizer in Ruby 3 with Ruby 2 performance
- Understood Jeremy, there are always compromises.
```
def bar(a:); end
def foo(*args); bar(*args); end;
```
There was a deliberate decision made to break `foo(a: 1)` here (by default) which has both its upsides and downsides.
... -
- As it is ignored and set at building packages automatically, it is
just nonsense to set in gemspec file for input. -
06:32 AM Revision 4eff8a66 (git): [flori/json] add metadata
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/9f430a7bba
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/1920653013
-
- https://github.com/flori/json/commit/78ec5e2bd3
-
- It's probably not worth it because there's nothing we can optimize in
such builtin methods. It's worth JIT only when inlined. -
- to prevent a random failure like
http://ci.rvm.jp/results/trunk-random2@phosphorus-docker/3024287 -
- Currently, iclasses are "shady", or not protected by write
barriers. Because of that, the GC needs to spend more time marking these
objects than otherwise. Let's insert write barriers for iclasses.
Applications that use modules heav... -
12:01 AM Bug #16977: Ambiguous lookup super for refinements
- ssnickolay (Nikolay Sverchkov) wrote:
> [In specification](https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/2.7.0/syntax/refinements_rdoc.html) we have the note
> ...
(snip)
> I don’t understand why `include` works differently than refining a method dir...