[#75687] [Ruby trunk Bug#12416] struct rb_id_table lacks mark function — shyouhei@...
Issue #12416 has been reported by Shyouhei Urabe.
3 messages
2016/05/23
[#75763] [Ruby trunk Feature#12435] Using connect_nonblock to open TCP connections in Net::HTTP#connect — mohamed.m.m.hafez@...
Issue #12435 has been reported by Mohamed Hafez.
3 messages
2016/05/28
[#75774] Errno::EAGAIN thrown by OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket#connect_nonblock — Mohamed Hafez <mohamed.m.m.hafez@...>
Hi all, every now and then in my production server, I'm
4 messages
2016/05/30
[#75775] Re: Errno::EAGAIN thrown by OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket#connect_nonblock
— Mohamed Hafez <mohamed.m.m.hafez@...>
2016/05/30
Or does MRI's OpenSSL::SSL::SSLSocket#connect_nonblock just return
[#75782] Important: Somewhat backwards-incompatible change (Fwd: [ruby-cvs:62388] duerst:r55225 (trunk): * string.c: Activate full Unicode case mapping for UTF-8) — Martin J. Dürst <duerst@...>
With the change below, I have activated full Unicode case mapping for
4 messages
2016/05/31
[ruby-core:75301] [Ruby trunk Feature#12334] Final/Readonly Support for Fields / Instance Variables
From:
duerst@...
Date:
2016-05-02 05:29:10 UTC
List:
ruby-core #75301
Issue #12334 has been updated by Martin D端rst. I agree with Shyouhei. If you are afraid of changing an instance variable in one of your classes' methods, maybe just name it @final_foo to remind you that you didn't want to change it. There are many other checks, too, that could be introduced into Ruby, but the Ruby way is to leave it to the programmer. ---------------------------------------- Feature #12334: Final/Readonly Support for Fields / Instance Variables https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12334#change-58428 * Author: Brady Wied * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- This sort of relates to https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11911 C# through 'readonly' and Java through 'final' variables/fields allow me to only allow assigning a field in the initializer. It might be nice to embrace some controlled mutation by having this feature in Ruby. Sometimes its tempting in other methods to reassign a field but you really want to control that from the initializer. Freezing targets a different problem by controlling what I can mutate within that field's object. The two can compliment each other but I see them as each solving a different problem. I know it's possible to freeze an entire instance of a class and not allow reassigning the field that way, but then I'm in an all or none situation where I can't have controlled mutation. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>