[#41431] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694][Open] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account. — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>
27 messages
2011/12/01
[#41442] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
2011/12/01
[#41443] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
2011/12/01
Maybe we can add a new arity_range method that does this?
[#41446] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>
2011/12/02
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com> wrote:
[#41450] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
2011/12/02
You could probably extract the information from #parameters, yeah.
[#41452] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Trans <transfire@...>
2011/12/02
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com> wrote:
[#41454] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5694] Proc#arity doesn't take optional arguments into account.
— Yehuda Katz <wycats@...>
2011/12/02
Yeahit would be nice to be able to do:
[#41435] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5695][Open] CoffeeScript "is" and "isnt" keywords — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>
6 messages
2011/12/01
[#41456] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5700][Open] fork {} segfaults during VM cleanup when run inside Fiber — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
6 messages
2011/12/03
[#41478] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5707][Open] temporary file creation without finalizer and delegate. — Akira Tanaka <akr@...>
7 messages
2011/12/04
[#41481] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5707][Open] temporary file creation without finalizer and delegate.
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2011/12/04
Akira Tanaka <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
[#41484] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #5707][Open] temporary file creation without finalizer and delegate.
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/12/05
2011/12/5 Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>:
[#41496] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714][Open] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP — Heesob Park <phasis@...>
22 messages
2011/12/06
[#41500] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— Heesob Park <phasis@...>
2011/12/06
[#41501] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/12/06
Hello,
[#41578] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/09
[#41601] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/12/12
Hello,
[#41671] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— Hiroshi Shirosaki <h.shirosaki@...>
2011/12/15
[#41684] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5714] Unexpected error of STDIN#read with non-ascii input on Windows XP
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/12/16
Hello,
[#41511] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5719][Open] Hash::[] can't handle 100000+ args — Nick Quaranto <nick@...>
13 messages
2011/12/07
[#41541] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5726][Open] Process::EXIT_SUCCESS and Process::EXIT_FAILURE — Akira Tanaka <akr@...>
4 messages
2011/12/08
[#41557] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
14 messages
2011/12/08
[#41559] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2011/12/09
2011/12/9 Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org>:
[#41560] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/12/09
Hi,
[#41561] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong
— =?windows-1252?Q?Matthias_W=E4chter?= <matthias@...>
2011/12/09
Hi Matz,
[#41581] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5737][Open] WEBrick doesn't support keep alive connections for 204 and 304 responses — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>
8 messages
2011/12/10
[#41586] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5741][Open] Secure Erasure of Passwords — Martin Bosslet <Martin.Bosslet@...>
17 messages
2011/12/10
[#41592] My bug evaluation criteria — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...>
I don't think there is an official way to judge a bug, but for me it
4 messages
2011/12/11
[#41594] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5746][Open] Proc#curry too strict about lambda's arity. — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...>
7 messages
2011/12/11
[#41618] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5754][Open] Double require bug in 1.9.3 — Evan Phoenix <evan@...>
5 messages
2011/12/12
[#41630] redmine.ruby-lang.org -> bugs.ruby-lang.org — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...>
Hello,
6 messages
2011/12/13
[#41634] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5759][Open] flatten calls to_ary on everything — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
8 messages
2011/12/13
[#41656] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5763][Open] sprintf not throwing error for wrong number of arguments — NagaChaitanya Vellanki <me@...>
8 messages
2011/12/14
[#41662] [ruby-trunk - Bug #5765][Open] [PATCH] modernize Timeout usage in net/{http,pop,smtp,telnet} — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
9 messages
2011/12/15
[#41668] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5766][Open] Hash.each_with_object should behave differently when block's arity is 3 — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
5 messages
2011/12/15
[#41672] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5767][Open] Cache expanded_load_path to reduce startup time — Yura Sokolov <funny.falcon@...>
13 messages
2011/12/15
[#41681] Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc) — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
Since Ruby is built on top of simple concepts, most of the documentation
23 messages
2011/12/15
[#41683] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...>
2011/12/15
[#41686] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
2011/12/16
Em 15-12-2011 19:23, Gary Wright escreveu:
[#41688] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Gary Wright <gwtmp01@...>
2011/12/16
[#41732] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2011/12/19
On Dec 15, 2011, at 7:39 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
[#41734] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
2011/12/19
Em 19-12-2011 19:38, Eric Hodel escreveu:
[#41738] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2011/12/20
On Dec 19, 2011, at 3:04 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
[#41753] Re: Documentation of the language itself (syntax, meanings, etc)
— Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
2011/12/20
Em 19-12-2011 23:35, Eric Hodel escreveu:
[#41691] Ruby IRC Presence Problem — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...>
Hi,
3 messages
2011/12/16
[#41717] Feature : optional argument in File.join — Michel Demazure <michel@...>
In Windows, when using File.join, one often ends with a path containing
13 messages
2011/12/19
[#41719] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/19
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Michel Demazure <michel@demazure.com> wrote:
[#41720] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Michel Demazure <michel@...>
2011/12/19
Luis Lavena wrote in post #1037331:
[#41737] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/12/20
Hi,
[#41740] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2011/12/20
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:12, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#41742] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2011/12/20
Hi,
[#41744] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2011/12/20
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 08:17, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#41750] Re: Feature : optional argument in File.join
— Michel Demazure <michel@...>
2011/12/20
Nikolai Weibull wrote in post #1037488:
[#41721] Ruby and oniguruma relation. — V咜 Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>
Hi everybody,
5 messages
2011/12/19
[#41725] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5778][Open] Allow WEBrick::HTTPResponse to send IO-duck-typed bodies — Alex Young <alex@...>
6 messages
2011/12/19
[#41728] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5781][Open] Query attributes (attribute methods ending in `?` mark) — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
15 messages
2011/12/19
[#41755] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5781] Query attributes (attribute methods ending in `?` mark)
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/12/20
[#41774] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5788][Open] Thread#at_exit — Masaki Matsushita <glass.saga@...>
10 messages
2011/12/22
[#41798] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5788] Thread#at_exit
— Masaki Matsushita <glass.saga@...>
2011/12/24
[#42309] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5788] Thread#at_exit
— Masaki Matsushita <glass.saga@...>
2012/02/01
[#41780] [Backport93 - Backport #5793][Open] Please backport r33662, r33666 — Jon Forums <redmine@...>
8 messages
2011/12/22
[#41787] Breaking while loading — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
Hi!
4 messages
2011/12/22
[#41797] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5805][Open] object_hexid — Thomas Sawyer <transfire@...>
9 messages
2011/12/24
[#41799] Best way to separate implementation specific code? — Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
Hello,
15 messages
2011/12/24
[#41800] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2011/12/24
2011/12/24 Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com>:
[#41811] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/12/26
Hello,
[#41817] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/26
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 10:51 PM, U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp> wrote:
[#41828] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/27
Hello,
[#41830] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— "U.Nakamura" <usa@...>
2011/12/28
Hello,
[#41831] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/12/28
Hi,
[#41832] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/28
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 11:21 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#41833] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2011/12/28
Hi,
[#41840] Re: Best way to separate implementation specific code?
— Luis Lavena <luislavena@...>
2011/12/29
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 11:44 PM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#41812] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5809][Open] Benchmark#bm: remove the label_width parameter — Benoit Daloze <redmine@...>
11 messages
2011/12/26
[#41841] YAML has become very slow under 1.9 — j.wuttke <j.wuttke@...>
The simple script
7 messages
2011/12/29
[#41848] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5826][Open] When the RUBY API_VERSION will be increased? — Ayumu AIZAWA <ayumu.aizawa@...>
5 messages
2011/12/30
[ruby-core:41561] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #5730][Open] Optinal block parameters assigns wrong
From:
=?windows-1252?Q?Matthias_W=E4chter?= <matthias@...>
Date:
2011-12-09 08:31:31 UTC
List:
ruby-core #41561
Hi Matz,
Please excuse my ignorance, but why do we want this auto-splat behavior
in Ruby at all? For me this goes very much against the POLS. Has this
been discussed or documented somewhere for reference?
As a programmer, I would assume that when I send a message, e.g. via
block.call() which does support multiple arguments, each of these
arguments would be assigned to the block parameters in order,
irrespective of each argument痴 type/class. Why should arrays play
differently at all? If I want to splat at the sender side, I can simply
do that at will it痴 just one asterisk. If I want to splat at the
receiver, I can do as well. Things get worse as soon as the argument is
an object returned from deep inside the code, where I知 not sure about
its type. If it痴 some type other than array, the code does what I
expect. If it痴 an array, a magical splat happens.
What I壇 like to have is a much more consistent view of assignments with
less exceptionsケ.
# my expectation
a,b=[1,2] # => a=[1,2], b=nil
a,b=*[1,2] # => a=1, b=2
(a,b)=[1,2] # => a=1, b=2
a,b=1,2 # => a=1, b=2
a=1,2,3 # => a=1
*a=1,2,3 # => a=[1,2,3]
*a=[1,2,3] # => a=[[1,2,3]]
The only exception I壇 like to see in the specs is that applying a splat
on something that is un-splattable results in the object itself. All
other exceptions and automatisms should go away.
Matthias
[1]: I think I知 going to write a book called 迭uby by Exceptionsthat
covers all those "[ , but [" cases and unexpected automatisms in
Ruby specification that go against my understanding of POLS.