[#1651] A min/max bug? — "Christoph" <chr_news@...>
Hi,
[#1690] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — Elliott Hughes <ehughes@...>
In effect. I mean that if a method's interface is getting too complicated,
In article <AD4480A509455343AEFACCC231BA850F17C358@ukexchange>,
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 07:51:42PM +0900, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#1699] FileUtils bug and fix — Chad Fowler <chad@...>
As posted in ruby-talk:85349, I believe there is a bug in FileUtils.cp's
[#1706] gc_sweep in Ruby 1.8 — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>
I posted about this before but Matz wanted me to post more detail.
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
[#1711] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Tanaka Akira:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 07:12 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 08:26 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 09:32 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 11:13 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 05:32:09AM +0900, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
[#1716] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Tanaka Akira:
[#1718] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — Elliott Hughes <ehughes@...>
In article <AD4480A509455343AEFACCC231BA850F17C434@ukexchange>,
On Saturday 22 November 2003 04:34 pm, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311221024.05642.transami@runbox.com>,
On Sunday 23 November 2003 02:24 am, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311230325.21687.transami@runbox.com>,
On Sunday 23 November 2003 03:10 pm, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311230648.41003.transami@runbox.com>,
On Monday 24 November 2003 03:19, Tanaka Akira wrote:
Sean E Russell [mailto:ser@germane-software.com] wrote:
[#1753] gc_sweep under 1.8 ... not syck.so — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>
We still encountered a gc_sweep in our use of Ruby 1.8 on Linux (v8).
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
Yes, there are several (Ruby) threads working during this gc_sweep.
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
of course this effects 300 machines ;-)
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
The saga continues:
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
There is a discussion (found by chad fowler) on ruby-dev (22000)
[#1755] Re: Controlled block variables — Jamis Buck <jgb3@...>
On Mon, 2003-11-24 at 02:04, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 05:22 pm, Jamis Buck wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 11:51, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 06:40 pm, Sean E Russell wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 14:02, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 09:15 pm, Sean E Russell wrote:
[#1799] Syck install on Debian Standard (Ruby 1.6.7) — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Hi, I'm having some trouble installing Syck on Debain (woody). I'm not
On Friday 28 November 2003 09:17 am, T. Onoma wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 05:22:48PM +0900, T. Onoma wrote:
[#1819] Re: configure.in: do not override CCDLDFLAGS, LDFLAGS, XLDFLAGS — Eric Sunshine <sunshine@...>
Hello,
Re: "stereotyping"
Sorry I forgot to post results of DuckHunter examples. (DuckHunter itself is
also included below).
DuckHunter is a concise probe providing the functionality of #duck_signature,
and has a unique feature that suggests how Ruby might proceed to cleaning up
some of its code: If a type error returns the method that was not implemented
in the error message then DuckHunter will fix and continue to probe. Using
this on a number of libraries I have discoverd that ruby has a problem in
that it allows TypeError to be raised for any reason whatsoever. There needs
to be a tighter system for raising TypeErrors, including returning the
offened method. I believe that one of the first things that needs to happen
to improve Ruby's type mechanics is to ensure that a signature probe can run
without fail on any method.
Results:
DUCK QUACKS
big4:
succ()
to_i()
>()
>(Fixnum)
DUCK QUACKS
#<DuckHunter:0x402a8738>
#<DuckHunter:0x402a8738>
#<DuckHunter:0x402a8738>
#<DuckHunter:0x402a8738>
ameth:
succ()
jump(Fixnum)
to_i()
to_i()
>()
>(Fixnum)
do_what_ever(String,Regexp)
do_what_ever(String,Regexp,Fixnum)
-t0
On Saturday 22 November 2003 02:22 am, T. Onoma wrote:
> and i thought it was so radical when i wrote it yesterday
>
> # notice if TypeErrors woud return offending respond_to? method
> # in error message then it would continue to probe
>
> class DuckHunter
>
> def initialize
> @a_r_g_s = {}
> end
>
> def a_r_g_s
> @a_r_g_s
> end
>
> def d_u_c_k_c_a_l_l
> begin
> yield
> rescue TypeError => e
> self.send(e.message)
> retry
> end
> end
>
> def method_missing(aSym, *args)
> # This will happen the first time
> aSymStr = aSym.to_s
> @a_r_g_s["#{aSymStr}"] = [ args.collect { |a| "#{a.class}" } ]
> begin
> d = %Q{
> def self.#{aSymStr}(*args)
> # This will happen the subsequent time
> @a_r_g_s["#{aSymStr}"] } + %q{.concat [ args.collect { |a|
> "#{a.class}" } ]
> self
> end
> }
> instance_eval d
> rescue SyntaxError
> puts "TypeError induced SyntaxError! TypeError must return respond_to
> method!"
> raise
> end
> self
> end
>
> end
>
> # example
>
> class TypeTest
> def ameth(x)
> big4 x
> #---
> puts x.to_i
> puts x.jump(4)
> puts x.do_what_ever("Duck can take it!", /\w+/)
> puts x.do_what_ever("Duck can take it!", /\w+/, 42)
> end
> end
>
> t = TypeTest.new
>
> puts "\nDUCK QUACKS"
>
> dh = DuckHunter.new
> dh.d_u_c_k_c_a_l_l do
> t.ameth(dh)
> end
>
> # show args
> puts "\nameth:"
> dh.a_r_g_s.each { |name, argpat| argpat.each { |args| puts "\t#{name}
> (#{args.join(',')})" } }
>
> # -----------
>
> On Saturday 22 November 2003 12:52 am, Greg McIntyre wrote:
> > "David Naseby" <david.naseby@eonesolutions.com.au> wrote:
> > > Below is a quick hack to do that. Needs work. Needs redirection of IO.
> > > But its kinda cute.. Has issues with side effects, of course, and
> > > printing crapola all over the place.
> >
> > Is this or something like it on the RAA? Perhaps a slightly more general
> > mechanism to proxy messages to the "real" object and call a
> > hook/callback?
>
> late could be added