[#44036] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6242][Open] Ruby should support lists — "shugo (Shugo Maeda)" <redmine@...>
20 messages
2012/04/01
[#44084] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6246][Open] 1.9.3-p125 intermittent segfault — "jshow (Jodi Showers)" <jodi@...>
22 messages
2012/04/02
[#44156] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265][Open] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax — "rosenfeld (Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas)" <rr.rosas@...>
45 messages
2012/04/06
[#44207] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax
— "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
2012/04/09
[#44211] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax
— Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
2012/04/09
Hi,
[#44232] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2012/04/09
(2012/04/09 14:19), Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#44163] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6266][Open] encoding related exception with recent integrated psych — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>
10 messages
2012/04/06
[#44233] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6274][Open] Float addition incorrect — "swanboy (Michael Swan)" <swanyboy4@...>
3 messages
2012/04/09
[#44303] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6284][Open] Add composition for procs — "pabloh (Pablo Herrero)" <pablodherrero@...>
57 messages
2012/04/12
[#44329] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6287][Open] nested method should only be visible by nesting/enclosing method — "botp (bot pena)" <botpena@...>
4 messages
2012/04/13
[#44349] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Open] new queue / blocking queues — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>
10 messages
2012/04/13
[#44354] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Assigned] new queue / blocking queues
— "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
2012/04/14
[#44357] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Assigned] new queue / blocking queues
— Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...>
2012/04/14
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 10:58:12AM +0900, mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote:
[#44384] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Assigned] new queue / blocking queues
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2012/04/16
Hi,
[#44391] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Assigned] new queue / blocking queues
— Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@...>
2012/04/16
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 06:25:59PM +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:
[#44372] Possible merge error of code in Issue 4651 on to Ruby 1.9.3-p125? — "Blythe,Aaron" <ABLYTHE@...>
tl;dr I believe I have uncovered a merge error to ruby 1.9.3-p125 from Issu=
3 messages
2012/04/16
[#44431] [Backport93 - Backport #6314][Open] Backport r35374 and r35375 — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <[email protected]>
4 messages
2012/04/18
[#44432] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6315][Open] handler to trace output of each line of code executed — "ankopainting (Anko Painting)" <anko.com+ruby@...>
9 messages
2012/04/18
[#44533] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341][Open] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join — "rudolf (r stu3)" <redmine@...>
24 messages
2012/04/22
[#44564] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— "kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI)" <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2012/04/23
[#44573] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
2012/04/24
Hello,
[#44577] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2012/04/24
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Yusuke Endoh <[email protected]> wrote:
[#44582] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
2012/04/24
Hello,
[#44596] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2012/04/24
(4/24/12 6:55 AM), Yusuke Endoh wrote:
[#44579] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— "naruse (Yui NARUSE)" <naruse@...>
2012/04/24
[#44581] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2012/04/24
> kosaki (Motohiro KOSAKI) wrote:
[#44540] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6343][Open] Improved Fiber documentation — "andhapp (Anuj Dutta)" <anuj@...>
6 messages
2012/04/23
[#44612] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6354][Open] Remove escape (break/return/redo/next support) from class/module scope — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>
8 messages
2012/04/25
[#44630] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361][Open] Bitwise string operations — "MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)" <Martin.Bosslet@...>
31 messages
2012/04/26
[#44713] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361] Bitwise string operations
— "MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)" <Martin.Bosslet@...>
2012/04/28
[#44731] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361] Bitwise string operations
— KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
2012/04/28
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:53 PM, MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)
[#44759] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361] Bitwise string operations
— Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>
2012/04/29
On Saturday, April 28, 2012 at 8:52 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[#44636] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6364][Open] Segmentation fault happend when running test_cptr.rb — "raylinn@... (ray linn)" <raylinn@...>
9 messages
2012/04/26
[#44667] possible YAML bug in ruby 1.9.3p125? — Young Hyun <youngh@...>
YAML in ruby 1.9.3p125 seems to have a bug reading in YAML from older =
4 messages
2012/04/27
[#44686] [BUG] not a node 0x07 — ronald braswell <rpbraswell@...>
Running ruby 1.8.6 on Solaris 10.
7 messages
2012/04/27
[#44688] Re: [BUG] not a node 0x07
— "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
2012/04/27
2012/4/28 ronald braswell <[email protected]>:
[#44694] Re: [BUG] not a node 0x07
— ronald braswell <rpbraswell@...>
2012/04/27
I have heard reports of this on 1.9.x. Do you know if this problem has
[#44704] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6373][Open] public #self — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>
61 messages
2012/04/27
[#44735] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6373] public #self
— "matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)" <matz@...>
2012/04/28
[#59892] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6373] public #self
— ruby-core@...
2014/01/20
Issue #6373 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune.
[#44743] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6375][Open] Python notation for literal Hash — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>
10 messages
2012/04/28
[#44748] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6376][Open] Feature lookup and checking if feature is loaded — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>
13 messages
2012/04/28
[#44832] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6376][Feedback] Feature lookup and checking if feature is loaded
— "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
2012/05/03
[#44835] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #6376][Feedback] Feature lookup and checking if feature is loaded
— Nikolai Weibull <now@...>
2012/05/03
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 6:02 AM, mame (Yusuke Endoh) <[email protected]> wrote:
[ruby-core:44135] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4264] General type coercion protocol for Ruby
From:
"mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
Date:
2012-04-04 22:48:00 UTC
List:
ruby-core #44135
Issue #4264 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh). And I'd like to add some question. == Why do you want to remove the monkey-patching? If you are worried about method name conflict, this proposal does not solve the problem because the class names still collide. If you dislike monkey-patching just because it is monkey-patching, refinement (#4085) may be more general solution. == Method name I understand you want to avoid bikeshed, but I think it is inevitable in this proposal. == Performance I don't think this is so big problem :-) -- Yusuke Endoh <[email protected]> ---------------------------------------- Feature #4264: General type coercion protocol for Ruby https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4264#change-25661 Author: headius (Charles Nutter) Status: Assigned Priority: Normal Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) Category: Target version: =begin Justification: Ruby objects variously define to_ary, to_int and others for either explicit (before call) or implicit (during call) coercion. However, the set of methods is limited, and adding more names just clutters namespaces and isn't feasible long-term anyway. This proposal will hopefully start a discussion toward adding a general type-coercion protocol via a #to or #to_any method. To blunt the naming discussion a bit, I will refer to it as #to_x. Description: The #to_x method will be a "supermethod" of sorts that can be used to coerce a given object to an arbitrary type. Where currently there are specific methods for coercing to specific types (to_ary, to_str), and other more general methods intended not for coercion but for explicitly re-structuring an object's data (to_a, to_s), there's no one protocol for doing general coercion. #to_x would fill the roles of the coercion methods, accepting a target class and responding appropriately. The response will depend on whether the target object can be coerced to the given type. The result for success should obviously be an instance of the target type. The result for failure could either be "soft": returning nil, or "hard": raising an error. There could also be an optional boolean flag that specifies hard or soft. Existing coercion methods could (but need not be) implemented in terms of #to_x def to_ary to_x(Array) end def to_str to_x(String) end Prior art: JRuby supports coercing Ruby objects to arbitrary Java types in this way. Currently only a set of hard-coded target types are supported for various core Ruby classes, but this is intended to eventually be part of the invocation protocol when calling Java. In other words, if the object being passed is not the exact type of the target parameter, JRuby will invoke to_java(target_param_type) to do the coercion. Performance implications in this are obvious...so there may need to be discussions about modifying this protocol to make it easier to optimize. =end -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/