[#1207] warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...>

This message was posted to ruby-talk, but I didn't get responce from

22 messages 2003/07/01
[#1208] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/01

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1209] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/02

ts wrote:

[#1210] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/02

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1211] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1212] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/04

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1213] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1214] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/04

>>>>> "E" == Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@itgrp.net> writes:

[#1215] Re: warning in ruby extension eats memory — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...> 2003/07/04

ts wrote:

[#1237] FTP.new with block — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>

Hi,

22 messages 2003/07/19
[#1238] Re: [Patch] FTP.new with block — ts <decoux@...> 2003/07/19

>>>>> "G" == Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> writes:

[#1240] Re: [Patch] FTP.new with block — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2003/07/19

[#1297] Fix for Bug 1058 — Markus Walser <walser@...>

Hi,

16 messages 2003/07/25

Re: adding NodeDump and ii

From: Dave Thomas <dave@...>
Date: 2003-07-27 14:58:53 UTC
List: ruby-core #1317
nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:


> I'd like NodeDump and ii to be contained in standard
> distribution.  Dave and Guy, what do you feel?

I have to admit that I'm getting somewhat worried by the size of the 
standard distribution. Perhaps the criteria for entry should be "do 
people use this a lot already?" If they do, then we make things more 
convenient for them by including it. If they don't then we add to the 
bloat of the language, and we add to the maintainers' overhead by 
putting it in.

In the case of NodeDump, I'm not sure if many people do use it, and 
therefore whether it is a good thing to include. You're welcome to add 
it if you'd like, though.

A possible suggestion.  We could keep a separate CVS tree for developer 
tools such as this, and set up a CVS module so that developers could 
check out both that stuff and the Ruby core together. That way they'd be 
integrated for developers, but not for the general users.


Cheers


Dave




In This Thread

Prev Next