Ruby Issue Tracking System: Issueshttps://redmine.ruby-lang.org/https://redmine.ruby-lang.org/favicon.ico?17113305112013-06-19T04:50:40ZRuby Issue Tracking System
Redmine Ruby master - Bug #8541 (Rejected): Open3.popen3 creates a broken stdout pipehttps://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/85412013-06-19T04:50:40Zferrous26 (Mark Rada)markrada26@gmail.com
<p>When I create a subprocess using Open3, the stdout pipe that is returned does allow reading.</p>
<p>Using the sample code provided, Ruby will block indefinitely waiting to read from the subprocess, though the subprocess has printed out to standard output.</p>
<p>If you change the test script to print/read from standard error instead, then everything works.</p> Ruby master - Bug #6203 (Closed): Array#values_at does not handle ranges with end index past the ...https://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/62032012-03-26T13:50:52Zferrous26 (Mark Rada)markrada26@gmail.com
<p>=begin<br>
When I use Array#values_at I expect that it would be the same as successive calls to (({Array#[]})).</p>
<p>There is one case where this does not hold:</p>
<pre><code>a = [0,1,2,3,4,5]
a[4..6] # => [4, 5]
a.values_at(4..6) # => [4,5,nil]
</code></pre>
<p>I think this is an inconsistency in the design of (({Array#values_at})). We can look at a more extreme case:</p>
<pre><code>a[4..100] # => [4, 5]
a.values_at 4..100 # => [4, 5, nil]
</code></pre>
<p>And now it doesn't make any sense.</p>
<p>I think the best solution would be to make (({Array#values_at})) be equivalent to successive calls to (({Array#[]})). I have patched (({rb_range_beg_len()})) to handle the extra case and opened a pull request on github.<br>
=end</p>