[#72745] [Ruby trunk - Misc #11876] [Closed] Scheduled maintenance 2016/01/01 — shibata.hiroshi@...
Issue #11876 has been updated by Hiroshi SHIBATA.
shibata.hiroshi@gmail.com wrote:
[#72824] [Ruby trunk - Bug #11973] IO#advise should raise NotImplementedError on platforms that do not support that call — git@...
Issue #11973 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
[#72954] [Ruby trunk - Feature #12010] [Assigned] Exclude dot and dotdot from Dir#each — naruse@...
Issue #12010 has been reported by Yui NARUSE.
naruse@airemix.jp wrote:
[#73313] [Ruby trunk - Bug #12007] [Open] Newly added Unicode data file doesn't get downloaded — shugo@...
Issue #12007 has been updated by Shugo Maeda.
[#73372] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — benton@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Benton Barnett.
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 5:13 PM, <benton@bentonbarnett.com> wrote:
[#73421] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — nekocat432@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Ruby Dino.
I’m sorry, but this, like the code of merit, is merely a derailing tactic.
On 2016/01/26 01:32, Austin Ziegler wrote:
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
[#73491] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — git@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Chuck Remes.
They will never provide any numbers because they are not engineers and they
Coraline is a panelist on Ruby rogues and a very well respected member of
OK, sorry for previous comment. Let's try this way.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Andrew Kirilenko <
[#73558] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — andrew.kirilenko@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Andrew Kirilenko.
Andrew, please stop digging. Your hole is only getting deeper.
>Andrew, please stop digging. Your hole is only getting deeper.
[#73586] [Ruby trunk - Misc #12004] Code of Conduct — andrew@...
Issue #12004 has been updated by Andrew Vit.
[#73593] [Ruby trunk - Bug #12034] RegExp does not respect file encoding directive — nobu@...
Issue #12034 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.
[ruby-core:72818] Re: [Ruby trunk - Bug #11975] Range#last is not consistent and possibly does not do what is expected.
I haven't found this behaviour surprising at all. Maybe it痴 because I'm almost always using literal ranges and this lead me to think of `Range#last` as 堵ive me the last element of the range痴 _definition_ (regardless of exclude_end?) i.e. I expect `(0...1).last` to behave like `[0, 1].last`. Am 12.01.16 um 10:08 schrieb samuel@oriontransfer.org: > Issue #11975 has been updated by Samuel Williams. > > > Nakada-san, `(0.0...1.0).last` would probably give the same error as `(0.0...1.0).to_a`? > > Marc, even though it's intentional, and even documented, it's still not obvious that this is desirable behaviour. What I did find, is an equivalent method, `max`, which does do what I needed. I know practically speaking that this is not possible to fix this issue. Perhaps the best course of action would be to (a) not do anything or (b) deprecate `last` since it's behaviour is confusing and there are several alternatives. > > ---------------------------------------- > Bug #11975: Range#last is not consistent and possibly does not do what is expected. > https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11975#change-56059 > > * Author: Samuel Williams > * Status: Rejected > * Priority: Normal > * Assignee: > * ruby -v: 2.3.0 > * Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN > ---------------------------------------- > The following example demonstrates an inconsistency with Range: > > This is expected behaviour: > > ~~~ > (0..10).last => 10 > (0..10).to_a.last => 10 > ~~~ > > This is unexpected behaviour: > > ~~~ > (0...10).last => 10 # (should be 9?) > (0...10).to_a.last => 9 > ~~~ > > I believe that Range#last should give the last valid value for a range. Discussion? > > > Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>