[#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:44514] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6335][Open] Allow Ruby hacker to extend a module or a class, without needing to know if it is a module or a class
From:
"shevegen (markus heiler)" <shevegen@...>
Date:
2012-04-21 23:16:30 UTC
List:
ruby-core #44514
Issue #6335 has been reported by shevegen (markus heiler).
----------------------------------------
Bug #6335: Allow Ruby hacker to extend a module or a class, without needing to know if it is a module or a class
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6335
Author: shevegen (markus heiler)
Status: Open
Priority: Low
Assignee:
Category:
Target version:
ruby -v: All Ruby
Hi,
Please correct me if I am wrong.
I think in order to extend a module or a class, you must do
something like this (first, two examples, one for module,
one for a class):
module Foo
def test
puts 'This is test from module Foo.'
end
end
class Bar
def test
puts 'This is test from class Bar.'
end
end
Now to modify the behaviour:
module Foo
def test
puts 'This is test from module Foo, but modified.'
end
end
class Bar
def test
puts 'This is test from class Bar, but modified.'
end
end
My question is, why does the Ruby hacker need to know that he
modifies a class or a module? It feels like a (small) obstacle
for no real gain I can see.
I would propose something else like:
extend Bar
def test
puts 'We now modified Bar but we don't care whether it is a module or a class.'
end
end
I am not sure about "extend" as keyword. I thought about other keywords, but I could
not find good ones. So I also have to admit that sticking to "class" and "module" as
we do right now is not a bad solution - because we don't need any new word.
Still I wanted to suggest this, so that I can understand the design decision better.
Thank you for reading.
--
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/