[#7043] RUBYOPT versioning? — Caleb Tennis <caleb@...>
Matz, others:
4 messages
2006/01/02
[#7050] RDoc patches for BigDecimal in Ruby CVS — mathew <meta@...>
Now that 1.8.4 is out and the initial flurry of problem reports has died
4 messages
2006/01/03
[#7055] More on VC++ 2005 — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
Okay. I've got Ruby compiling. I'm attempting to get everything in
17 messages
2006/01/05
[#7058] Re: More on VC++ 2005
— nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@...>
2006/01/06
Hi,
[#7066] Re: More on VC++ 2005
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2006/01/06
On 05/01/06, nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com> wrote:
[#7069] Re: More on VC++ 2005
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2006/01/06
On 06/01/06, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:
[#7085] Re: More on VC++ 2005
— nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@...>
2006/01/10
Hi,
[#7086] Re: More on VC++ 2005
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2006/01/10
On 09/01/06, nobuyoshi nakada <nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com> wrote:
[#7057] 64-bit Solaris READ_DATA_PENDING Revisited — Steven Lumos <steven@...>
2 messages
2006/01/06
[#7078] CRC - a proof-of-concept Ruby compiler — Anders Hkersten <chucky@...>
Hello everyone,
6 messages
2006/01/09
[#7084] mathn: ugly warnings — hadmut@... (Hadmut Danisch)
Hi,
22 messages
2006/01/10
[#7097] Re: mathn: ugly warnings
— Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@...>
2006/01/10
Hadmut Danisch wrote:
[#7098] Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/01/10
Daniel Berger wrote:
[#7118] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/01/12
*Dean Wampler *<deanwampler gmail.com> writes:
[#7123] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2006/01/12
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, mathew wrote:
[#7124] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— ara.t.howard@...
2006/01/12
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
[#7125] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— James Britt <ruby@...>
2006/01/12
ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
[#7126] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— ara.t.howard@...
2006/01/12
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, James Britt wrote:
[#7142] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/01/13
Dean Wampler <deanwampler gmail.com> writes:
[#7145] Re: Design contracts and refactoring (was Re: mathn: ugly warnings)
— Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
2006/01/13
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, mathew wrote:
[#7100] core dump with ruby 1.9.0 (2006-01-10) and bdb-0.5.8 — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
I found following test script dumps core.
6 messages
2006/01/11
[#7101] Re: core dump with ruby 1.9.0 (2006-01-10) and bdb-0.5.8
— ts <decoux@...>
2006/01/11
>>>>> "T" == Tanaka Akira <akr@m17n.org> writes:
[#7102] Re: core dump with ruby 1.9.0 (2006-01-10) and bdb-0.5.8
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/01/11
In article <200601110905.k0B950Op001713@moulon.inra.fr>,
[#7109] Calling flock with block? — Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Hi,
7 messages
2006/01/11
[#7111] Re: Calling flock with block?
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2006/01/11
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Bertram Scharpf wrote:
[#7129] YAML.load({[]=>""}.to_yaml) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
I found that current YAML doesn't round trip {[]=>""}.
9 messages
2006/01/12
[#7135] Re: YAML.load({[]=>""}.to_yaml)
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2006/01/13
Hi.
[#7154] Re: YAML.load({[]=>""}.to_yaml)
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2006/01/15
Hi.
[#7155] Re: YAML.load({[]=>""}.to_yaml)
— Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
2006/01/15
In article <20060115202203.D3624CA0.ocean@m2.ccsnet.ne.jp>,
[#7162] FileUtils.mv does not unlink source file when moving over filesystem boundary — Pav Lucistnik <pav@...>
Hi,
4 messages
2006/01/16
[#7166] Re: FileUtils.mv does not unlink source file when moving over filesystem boundary
— ara.t.howard@...
2006/01/16
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
[#7178] Add XHTML 1.0 Output Support to Ruby CGI — Paul Duncan <pabs@...>
The attached patch against Ruby 1.8.4 adds XHTML 1.0 output support to
5 messages
2006/01/20
[#7186] Ruby 1.9 and FHS — "Kirill A. Shutemov" <k.shutemov@...>
Build and install system changes:
6 messages
2006/01/23
[#7195] trouble due ruby redefining posix function eaccess — noreply@...
Bugs item #3317, was opened at 2006-01-24 15:33
5 messages
2006/01/24
[#7197] SSL-enabled DRb fds on SSLError? — ctm@... (Clifford T. Matthews)
Howdy,
8 messages
2006/01/24
[#7198] Re: SSL-enabled DRb fds on SSLError?
— Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
2006/01/24
On Jan 24, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Clifford T. Matthews wrote:
[#7200] Re: SSL-enabled DRb fds on SSLError?
— ctm@... (Clifford T. Matthews)
2006/01/24
Patch worked fine against HEAD.
[#7203] bcc32's memory manager bug — "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
Hi.
1 message
2006/01/25
[#7211] Some troubles with an embedded ruby interpreter — Matt Mower <matt.mower@...>
Hi folks,
4 messages
2006/01/25
[#7216] String#scan loops forefever if scanned string is modified inside block. — noreply@...
Bugs item #3329, was opened at 2006-01-26 10:55
3 messages
2006/01/26
[#7226] Fwd: Re: Question about massive API changes — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>
Hello,
23 messages
2006/01/28
[#7248] Re: Fwd: Re: Question about massive API changes
— Charles Thornton <ceo@...>
2006/01/30
Sean E. Russell wrote:
[#7228] Re: Question about massive API changes
— Caleb Tennis <caleb@...>
2006/01/28
>
[#7233] Re: Question about massive API changes
— Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...>
2006/01/28
On 1/28/06, Caleb Tennis <caleb@aei-tech.com> wrote:
[#7234] Re: Question about massive API changes
— "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>
2006/01/28
On Saturday 28 January 2006 17:13, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
[#7242] Re: Question about massive API changes
— mathew <meta@...>
2006/01/29
Sean E. Russell wrote:
[#7249] PATCH: append option to sysread — Yohanes Santoso <ysantoso-rubycore@...>
6 messages
2006/01/30
[#7259] TCP/UDP server weird lags on 1.8.4 linux — "Bill Kelly" <billk@...>
Hi !
6 messages
2006/01/31
Re: Calling flock with block?
From:
ara.t.howard@...
Date:
2006-01-12 00:29:55 UTC
List:
ruby-core #7113
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> It seems likely to me that a lot of people have implemented exactly that
> same piece of code, probably more than once. The #flock method doesn't
> have a block_given case already, and it's pretty unambiguous how it
> should handle that case...
i sure have. on the otherhand it is generally redundant since closing the
file is guaranteed to release the lock... so unless you need
open(path,"r+") do |f|
f.flock(File::LOCK_EX) do
...
end
f.something
end
it's not needed. also, since getting a lock releases ALL other locks on the
file this needs to throw an error
open(path,"r+") do |f|
f.flock(File::LOCK_EX) do
f.flock(File::LOCK_SH) do
# we don't have the lock here, error should be raised!
end
end
end
child processes also affect lock so this should also throw
open(path,"r+") do |f|
f.flock(File::LOCK_EX) do
fork do
f.flock(File::LOCK_EX) do
...
end
end
# we don't have the lock here, error should be raised!
end
end
in the end i think it may be wise no allow applications to simply use ensure
where needed - a 'correct' impl is rather tricky.
regards.
-a
--
strong and healthy, who thinks of sickness until it strikes like lightning?
preoccupied with the world, who thinks of death, until it arrives like
thunder? -- milarepa