Da
Show enters and exits. Hide enters and exits.
| 02:43:01 | peterhil | boyscout nad brixen: Did you get NArray to build? |
| 05:47:23 | brixen | peterhil: yeah, I got it to build, but evan is fixing up some stuff in the C-API right now |
| 05:48:01 | brixen | when he's done, I'll see about getting it passing its tests |
| 13:49:05 | peterhil | brixen: great! :-) |
| 16:42:09 | weepy | This is intersting piece about compiling Ruby : |
| 16:42:10 | weepy | http://www.hokstad.com/the-problem-with-compiling-ruby.html |
| 16:42:41 | weepy | http://www.hokstad.com/the-problem-with-compiling-ruby.html |
| 16:43:10 | weepy | This is interesting piece about compiling Ruby : |
| 19:12:48 | libc | evan, hi, http://pastie.org/453656 |
| 19:18:19 | evan | hm |
| 19:18:27 | evan | there are much easier ways to do this |
| 19:18:40 | rue | I am not convinced dynamic locals are working correctly anyway |
| 19:19:29 | evan | libc: you're going to have to explain this to me |
| 19:19:31 | evan | i don't get the skip |
| 19:19:37 | evan | rue: please provide failing code |
| 19:20:05 | evan | libc: seems like the fast majority of this is unnecessary |
| 19:20:07 | libc | evan, for a in ... ; end is converted to .each do ... ; end… we create a new scope for a block |
| 19:20:15 | evan | libc: the Loop node should just never be used |
| 19:20:18 | evan | if you want this. |
| 19:20:25 | evan | then it works exactly like MRI |
| 19:20:43 | evan | libc: i think i'm confused |
| 19:20:45 | libc | evan, oh, yeah… |
| 19:20:47 | evan | because you've got stuff mixed |
| 19:20:53 | evan | i can't tell whats for the loop fix and whats for the for fix |
| 19:20:57 | libc | evan, there's two patches =) one for loop, the second for for |
| 19:21:12 | evan | but i can't tell where one patch starts and the other starts |
| 19:21:19 | evan | one patch ends, and the other starts, rather |
| 19:21:43 | libc | heh |
| 19:21:53 | evan | please redo it |
| 19:22:01 | evan | with them seperate |
| 19:22:07 | evan | otherwise i can't really figure it out. |
| 19:22:38 | rue | When/if I have the time |
| 19:23:08 | evan | rue: then they're not broken :) |
| 19:35:04 | libc | evan, http://pastie.org/453690 easy one (for scope) |
| 19:36:05 | evan | ok, that makes sense |
| 19:41:57 | rue | Yeh, sure it works fine. |
| 19:42:07 | rue | brixen: Seen http://blog.thinkrelevance.com/2009/3/26/introducing-micronaut-a-lightweight-bdd-framework ? |
| 19:44:24 | libc | evan, ok, for loop, should I stick to Loop class, or set @loop = true, and add conditions to bytecode ? (goto + check_interrupts + redo, next + block_call) |
| 19:44:53 | brixen | rue: hadn't, thanks |
| 19:44:53 | libc | s/redo, next/break, next/ |
| 19:45:03 | evan | libc: no |
| 19:45:12 | evan | if you want to pass this spec |
| 19:45:16 | evan | you have to not use the loop class |
| 19:45:19 | evan | Loop |
| 19:45:25 | evan | so the code that creates one should not do that anymore |
| 19:45:31 | evan | just do that and it should work |
| 19:48:40 | libc | eeemm. I don't get it. I better leave this spec alone |
| 20:11:12 | tilman | evan: did you deliberately put that early return in VMMethod::find_super_instructions in 214fe7e549? |
| 20:11:19 | evan | yeah |
| 20:11:26 | evan | to disable them. |
| 20:14:36 | tilman | ok |
| 20:14:51 | tilman | evan: just checking, since the commit comment didn't mention it |
| 20:15:00 | evan | yeah |
| 20:15:06 | evan | it was initially a mistake |
| 20:15:12 | evan | but then realized i wanted it there for now |
| 20:15:34 | tilman | ah |