[#48745] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7267][Open] Dir.glob on Mac OS X returns unexpected string encodings for unicode file names — "kennygrant (Kenny Grant)" <kennygrant@...>

17 messages 2012/11/02

[#48773] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7269][Open] Refinement doesn't work if using locate after method — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

12 messages 2012/11/03

[#48847] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7274][Open] UnboundMethods should be bindable to any object that is_a?(owner of the UnboundMethod) — "rits (First Last)" <redmine@...>

21 messages 2012/11/04

[#48854] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7276][Open] TestFile#test_utime failure — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>

14 messages 2012/11/04

[#48988] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7292][Open] Enumerable#to_h — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

40 messages 2012/11/06

[#48997] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7297][Open] map_to alias for each_with_object — "nathan.f77 (Nathan Broadbent)" <nathan.f77@...>

19 messages 2012/11/06

[#49001] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7298][Open] Behavior of Enumerator.new different between 1.9.3 and 2.0.0 — "ayumin (Ayumu AIZAWA)" <ayumu.aizawa@...>

12 messages 2012/11/06

[#49018] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7299][Open] Ruby should not completely ignore blocks. — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

13 messages 2012/11/07

[#49044] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7304][Open] Random test failures around test_autoclose_true_closed_by_finalizer — "luislavena (Luis Lavena)" <luislavena@...>

11 messages 2012/11/07

[#49196] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7322][Open] Add a new operator name #>< for bit-wise "exclusive or" — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2012/11/10

[#49211] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7328][Open] Move ** operator precedence under unary + and - — "boris_stitnicky (Boris Stitnicky)" <boris@...>

20 messages 2012/11/11

[#49229] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7331][Open] Set the precedence of unary `-` equal to the precedence `-`, same for `+` — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

17 messages 2012/11/11

[#49256] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7336][Open] Flexiable OPerator Precedence — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

18 messages 2012/11/12

[#49354] review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...>

Could we get a review on any open pull requests on github before the

12 messages 2012/11/15
[#49355] Re: review open pull requests on github — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2012/11/15

2012/11/15 Zachary Scott <[email protected]>:

[#49356] Re: review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...> 2012/11/15

Ok, I was hoping one of the maintainers might want to.

[#49451] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7374][Open] File.expand_path resolving to first file/dir instead of absolute path — mdube@... (Martin Dubé) <mdube@...>

12 messages 2012/11/16

[#49463] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375][Open] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/16
[#49494] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "vo.x (Vit Ondruch)" <v.ondruch@...> 2012/11/17

[#49467] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7377][Open] #indetical? as an alias for #equal? — "aef (Alexander E. Fischer)" <aef@...>

13 messages 2012/11/17

[#49558] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7395][Open] Negative numbers can't be primes by definition — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

10 messages 2012/11/19

[#49566] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7400][Open] Incorporate OpenSSL tests from JRuby. — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

11 messages 2012/11/19

[#49770] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7414][Open] Now that const_get supports "Foo::Bar" syntax, so should const_defined?. — "robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson)" <rob@...>

9 messages 2012/11/20

[#49950] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7427][Assigned] Update Rubygems — "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>

17 messages 2012/11/24

[#50043] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7429][Open] Provide options for core collections to customize behavior — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

10 messages 2012/11/24

[#50092] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7434][Open] Allow caller_locations and backtrace_locations to receive negative params — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/25

[#50094] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7436][Open] Allow for a "granularity" flag for backtrace_locations — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

11 messages 2012/11/25

[#50207] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7445][Open] strptime('%s %z') doesn't work — "felipec (Felipe Contreras)" <felipe.contreras@...>

19 messages 2012/11/27

[#50424] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7485][Open] ruby cannot build on mingw32 due to missing __sync_val_compare_and_swap — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <[email protected]>

15 messages 2012/11/30

[#50429] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7487][Open] Cutting through the issues with Refinements — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

13 messages 2012/11/30

[ruby-core:50329] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #4085] Refinements and nested methods

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2012-11-29 14:06:03 UTC
List: ruby-core #50329
In message "Re: [ruby-core:50299] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4085] Refinements and nested methods"
    on Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:02:03 +0900, "shugo (Shugo Maeda)" <[email protected]> writes:

|> * refinements are file scope
|> * only top-level "using" is available
|> * no module scope refinement
|
|Do these constraints just mean that main.using is available, but Module#using is not?

Yes, only main.using should be available. No Module#using (for 2.0).

|How should the following code behave?
|
|module R
|  refine String do
|    def foo; p :foo; end
|  end
|  "".foo # (a)
|end
|"".foo   # (b)
|
|Currently, (a) prints :foo, and (b) raises a NoMethodError.

Refinements will be available only from:

* the scope where refinements are added by calling "using"
* or inside of refine blocks

Inside of refine blocks (not whole module scope) might be
controversial, but I think it's OK to restrict refinements there.  As
a result, both (a) and (b) raise NoMethodError.  But "".foo can be called
from within the refine block.

|And, how about the following example, where a nested module is defined?
|
|module R
|  refine String do
|    def foo; p :foo; end
|  end
|
|  module M
|    "".foo
|  end
|  "".foo
|end
|"".foo

Every "".foo in the above example should raise NoMethodError, because
they are outside of refine blocks.  I admit I've been less careful
about nested refinement modules.  For nested refinement modules, it
should behave as following:

>module R
>  refine String do
>    def foo; p :foo; end
>  end
>
>  module M
>    refine Array do
>      "".foo  # => OK
>    end
>  end
>end
>
>using R::M
> "".foo  # => NG

|> In addition, Module#include should add refinements to included modules, e.g.
|
|This is very different from the current feature, so we need a discussion about it.
|What does "add refinements" mean here?
|There are two aspects about refinement addition.  They are defined in modules by Module#refine, and activated in certain scopes by using.
|Does "to add refinements" mean to define (or inherit indirectly) refinements in modules, or to activate refinements in modules, or both of them?

I meant included module will provide refinement of combination of including
module(s) and the module itself.

|For example, how should the following code behave?
|
|  module R1
|    refine String do
|      def bar
|        p :bar
|      end
|    end
|  end
|
|  module R2
|    include R1
|    refine String do
|      def foo
|        p :foo
|      end
|    end
|    "".foo
|    "".bar
|  end

Since all calls of "".foo and "".bar are outside of refine blocks,
they should raise NoMethodError.  But R2 should provide refinement to
add method #bar and #foo to String class.

|Finally, how super in refinements should behave in the new spec?

Refinements should come before normal methods, so super in the normal
method will not see a refined method, and super in the refined method
will see a normal method (or other refined method if refinements are
stacked).

The whole point is separation of defining refinements (for library
developers) and using refinements (for library users).

Any more questions?

							matz.

In This Thread

Prev Next