January 2023 - ruby-core - ml.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:111570] [Ruby master Bug#19295] Time#wday returns 7

by akostadinov (Aleksandar Kostadinov)

Issue #19295 has been reported by akostadinov (Aleksandar Kostadinov). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19295: Time#wday returns 7 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19295 * Author: akostadinov (Aleksandar Kostadinov) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.1.3p185 (2022-11-24 revision 1a6b16756e) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- This issue happens since Ruby 2.7, since `Z` and `UTC` are allowed for a zone. ``` ruby [1] pry(main)> Time.new(2023, 1,3,0,0,0,"UTC").wday => 7 [2] pry(main)> Time.new(2023, 1,3,0,0,0,"Z").wday => 7 ``` This also breaks all weekday `Time#monday?`, etc. methods. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

2
3
0 0

[ruby-core:111591] [Ruby master Feature#19303] Resolv::IPv4::Regex variant without anchors

by henk

Issue #19303 has been reported by henk (Hendrik Jäger). ---------------------------------------- Feature #19303: Resolv::IPv4::Regex variant without anchors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19303 * Author: henk (Hendrik Jäger) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ``` ruby require 'resolv' p "match this IP: 10.0.0.1"[/match this IP: (#{Resolv::IPv4::Regex})/, 1] ``` This returns 'nil' because Resolv::IPv4::Regex is anchored with \A and \z. I would like to have a variant of Resolv::IPv4::Regex available that is not anchored so that code would return '10.0.0.1'. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111586] [Ruby master Feature#14919] Add String#byteinsert

by noraj (Alexandre ZANNI)

Issue #14919 has been updated by noraj (Alexandre ZANNI). Yes a grapheme can be composed of several code points. An example is variant selector: ```ruby irb(main):001:0> a = "\u2665\n\u2764\n\u2665\ufe0f\n\u2764\ufe0f" => "♥\n❤\n♥️\n❤️" irb(main):002:0> puts a ♥ ❤ ♥️ ❤️ => nil irb(main):003:0> a.chars => ["♥", "\n", "❤", "\n", "♥", "️", "\n", "❤", "️"] ``` But fortunately, in Ruby, string indices are already mapping characters and not graphemes. So has Martin highlighted, `String#[]=` already cover all use cases I can think of. ```ruby irb(main):007:0> r = "I \u2665 Ruby!" => "I ♥ Ruby!" irb(main):009:0> r[2] = "\u2764\ufe0f" => "❤️" irb(main):010:0> r => "I ❤️ Ruby!" ``` The only thing I could think of `String#byteinsert` would be to directly mess with UTF-8 encoding to forge invalid encoding on purpose. But such a use case is rare and advanced and so can maybe be handled with pack and unpack rather than creating a new byteinsert method? ``` irb(main):014:0> r.unpack1('a*') => "I \xE2\x9D\xA4\xEF\xB8\x8F Ruby!" ``` @aycabta Maybe you could give me a handy example of the usage of `String#byteinsert` I can't think of? ---------------------------------------- Feature #14919: Add String#byteinsert https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14919#change-100956 * Author: aycabta (aycabta .) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- It's important for multibyte String editing. Unicode grapheme characters sometimes have plural code points. In text editing, software sometimes should add a new code point to an existing grapheme character. String#byteinsert is important for it. I implemented by pure Ruby in my code. https://github.com/aycabta/reline/blob/b17e5fd61092adfd7e87d576301e4e19a4d9… -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111556] [Ruby master Bug#19291] Ripper's on_parse_error token has wrong content

by tompng (tomoya ishida)

Issue #19291 has been reported by tompng (tomoya ishida). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19291: Ripper's on_parse_error token has wrong content https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19291 * Author: tompng (tomoya ishida) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.2.0 (2022-12-25 revision a528908271) [x86_64-darwin20] * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- Ruby 3.1 ~~~ruby Ripper::Lexer.new("{a:,aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\nhelloworld").scan.map(&:tok) # => ["{", "a:", ",", "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa", "", "\n", "helloworld"] ~~~ Ruby 3.2.0 ~~~ruby Ripper::Lexer.new("{a:,aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\nhelloworld").scan.map(&:tok) # => ["{", "a:", ",", "oworld\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000z`\u0001\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\xC0\xF0$\u0010\u0001\u0000\u0000\u0000\x80A\xB8\u0019\xB5\u007F\u0000\u0000\x91\x94", "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa", "\n", "helloworld"] ~~~ -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

2
1
0 0

[ruby-core:111563] [Ruby master Feature#16991] Sets: add Set#join

by zverok (Victor Shepelev)

Issue #16991 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev). Status changed from Open to Closed Implemented in Ruby 3.0 ---------------------------------------- Feature #16991: Sets: add Set#join https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16991#change-100928 * Author: marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- I'd like to add `#join` to `Set`: ```ruby # Now: Set[1, 2, 3].join('x') # => NoMethodError # After Set[1, 2, 3].join('x') # => "1x2x3" ``` I'd make this join never recursive. (I've never wanted to use the recursivity of `Array#join`, but it may very well just be my particular experience) Reminder: Why there is no `Enumerable#join`: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/1893 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111562] [Ruby master Feature#16995] Sets: <=> should be specialized

by zverok (Victor Shepelev)

Issue #16995 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev). Status changed from Open to Closed Implemented in Ruby 3.0: ```ruby Set[1] <=> Set[1, 2] # => -1 [Set[1], Set[1, 2]].sort # => [#<Set: {1}>, #<Set: {1, 2}>] ``` ---------------------------------------- Feature #16995: Sets: <=> should be specialized https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16995#change-100927 * Author: marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- This is quite minor, but `Set#<=>` should be refined. Reminder: `Set` defines `<`, `>`, etc. as inclusion, but does not have a corresponding `<=>`: ```ruby Set[1] < Set[1, 2] # => true Set[1] <=> Set[1, 2] # => nil, should be -1 Set[1] <=> Set[2] # => nil, ok, not orderable ``` The official stated reason for `Set` to *not* implement is that some sets are not comparable. That is exactly what `nil` result type is for IMO. Sets are partically ordered and `<=>` should reflect that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partially_ordered_set ```ruby Set[1] < Set[1, 2] # => true [Set[1], Set[1, 2]].sort # => ArgumentError, should be [Set[1], Set[1, 2]] [Set[1], Set[2]].sort # => ArgumentError, ok, can't be ordered ``` This is *exactly the same* idea as `Class`, which correctly refines `<=>`: ```ruby Array < Enumerable # => true Array <=> Enumerable # => -1, ok [Array, Enumerable].sort # => [Array, Enumerable] [Array, String].sort # => ArgumentError (comparison of Class with Class failed), ok ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111561] [Ruby master Feature#3591] Adding Numeric#divisor? (Have working implementation)

by e8c (Viktor Reznov)

Issue #3591 has been updated by e8c (Viktor Reznov). e8c (Viktor Reznov) wrote in #note-20: > Two solutions: 3rd: ```ruby def count_digits(n) = n.digits.count { n.modulo(_1).zero? } ``` ---------------------------------------- Feature #3591: Adding Numeric#divisor? (Have working implementation) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/3591#change-100926 * Author: duckinator (Marie Markwell) * Status: Rejected * Priority: Normal * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Target version: 2.6 ---------------------------------------- =begin On the 'duckinator' branch of my fork of ruby on github, I have added Numeric#divisor?: num.divisor?(other) is the same as: (num % other == 0) Example usage: 4.divisor?(2) #=> true 1.divisor?(2) #=> false 2.4.divisor?(1.2) #=> true 2.4.divisor?(1.3) #=> false 126.divisor?(9) #=> true I think this would be a very nice feature to add, and would make code using the old (num % other == 0) method much cleaner and easier to understand. There is a unified diff of it: http://gist.github.com/raw/484144/07b1a6e696cd9301e658ccbc8f90dfcd4d4ef3f1/… The original commits can be seen here: http://github.com/RockerMONO/ruby/commit/f7959f964cb0bf38418904ccb5643db6b6… -- First attempt, only worked with Integers http://github.com/RockerMONO/ruby/commit/12376a6bb1c3ffbd4b470850dd758e2dcd… -- Second attempt, should work with anything derived from Numeric that can be used as (num % other == 0) =end -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111560] [Ruby master Feature#3591] Adding Numeric#divisor? (Have working implementation)

by e8c (Viktor Reznov)

Issue #3591 has been updated by e8c (Viktor Reznov). matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote in #note-19: > Is it more useful than `n % m == 0`? Yes, statement `n .has_divisor? m` (or `m .divisor_of? n`) has 3 parts instead of 5, and gives a direct answer to the question. The "problem": https://leetcode.com/problems/count-the-digits-that-divide-a-number/ Two solutions: ```ruby def count_digits(n) = n.digits.count { n % _1 == 0 } def count_digits(n) = n.digits.count { _1.divisor_of?(n) } ``` The first is shorter, but the second is clearer. ---------------------------------------- Feature #3591: Adding Numeric#divisor? (Have working implementation) https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/3591#change-100925 * Author: duckinator (Marie Markwell) * Status: Rejected * Priority: Normal * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Target version: 2.6 ---------------------------------------- =begin On the 'duckinator' branch of my fork of ruby on github, I have added Numeric#divisor?: num.divisor?(other) is the same as: (num % other == 0) Example usage: 4.divisor?(2) #=> true 1.divisor?(2) #=> false 2.4.divisor?(1.2) #=> true 2.4.divisor?(1.3) #=> false 126.divisor?(9) #=> true I think this would be a very nice feature to add, and would make code using the old (num % other == 0) method much cleaner and easier to understand. There is a unified diff of it: http://gist.github.com/raw/484144/07b1a6e696cd9301e658ccbc8f90dfcd4d4ef3f1/… The original commits can be seen here: http://github.com/RockerMONO/ruby/commit/f7959f964cb0bf38418904ccb5643db6b6… -- First attempt, only worked with Integers http://github.com/RockerMONO/ruby/commit/12376a6bb1c3ffbd4b470850dd758e2dcd… -- Second attempt, should work with anything derived from Numeric that can be used as (num % other == 0) =end -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

1
0
0 0

[ruby-core:111519] [Ruby master Bug#19285] (docs.rlo) Split stdlib and core documents

by zzak (Zak Scott)

Issue #19285 has been reported by zzak (Zak Scott). ---------------------------------------- Bug #19285: (docs.rlo) Split stdlib and core documents https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19285 * Author: zzak (Zak Scott) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Backport: 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- It seems we merge all of the docs for stdlib and core into one for docs.ruby-lang.org, this creates weirdness like [Kernel](https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/master/Kernel.html) which includes monkey patches for rubygems for example. > RubyGems adds the gem method to allow activation of specific gem versions and overrides the require method on Kernel to make gems appear as if they live on the $LOAD_PATH. See the documentation of these methods for further detail. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

1 year, 4 months

2
1
0 0

2024

2023

2022

ruby-core January 2023