Actions
Misc #16933
closedDevelopersMeeting20200618Japan
Status:
Closed
Assignee:
-
Description
The next dev meeting¶
Date: 2020/06/18 13:00-17:00
Place/Agenda/Log: https://github.com/ruby/dev-meeting-log/blob/master/DevelopersMeeting20200618Japan.md
- Dev meeting IS NOT a decision-making place. All decisions should be done at the bug tracker.
- Dev meeting is a place we can ask Matz, nobu, nurse and other developers directly.
- Matz is a very busy person. Take this opportunity to ask him. If you can not attend, other attendees can ask instead of you (if attendees can understand your issue).
- We will write a log about the discussion to a file or to each ticket in English.
- All activities are best-effort (keep in mind that most of us are volunteer developers).
- The date, time and place are scheduled according to when/where we can reserve Matz's time.
- DO NOT discuss then on this ticket, please.
Call for agenda items¶
If you have a ticket that you want matz and committers to discuss, please post it into this ticket in the following format:
* [Ticket ref] Ticket title (your name)
* Comment (A summary of the ticket, why you put this ticket here, what point should be discussed, etc.)
Example:
* [Feature #14609] `Kernel#p` without args shows the receiver (ko1)
* I feel this feature is very useful and some people say :+1: so let discuss this feature.
- Comment deadline: 2020/06/11 (one week before the meeting)
- The format is strict. We'll use this script to automatically create an markdown-style agenda. We may ignore a comment that does not follow the format.
- Your comment is mandatory. We cannot read all discussion of the ticket in a limited time.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 4 years ago
- Related to Misc #14770: [META] DevelopersMeeting added
Updated by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) over 4 years ago
- [Bug #8446] sdbm fails to fetch existing key if many elements in it
- sdbm library is not maintain while a long time. Should we remove it from ruby repo skipping the bundled gems?
- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8446#note-5
- [Feature #16963] Remove English.rb from Ruby 2.8/3.0
- Should we remove English.rb?
Updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) over 4 years ago
- [Bug #9573] descendants of a module don't gain its future ancestors, but descendants of a class, do (jeremyevans0)
- Support for Module#include was implemented 3 months ago
- Bugs prevented support for Module#prepend at the time
- I've since fixed all bugs
- Implementing support for Module#prepend is now straightforward and causes no test failures, is it OK to merge the patch?
- [Feature #14267] Lazy proc allocation introduced in #14045 creates regression (jeremyevans0)
- I added a patch implementing Proc#== and #eql? (previously not implemented, so Object#== and #eql? were used)
- Do the equalivance conditions I describe make sense, or should more be added?
- Is it OK to merge the patch?
- [Bug #11669] inconsitent behavior of refining frozen class (jeremyevans0)
- Refining a frozen class where the refinement adds a method is currently broken.
- Refinement methods are internal, so I'm not sure we should raise FrozenError in this case
- Is it OK to merge the patch?
- [Bug #16504]
foo(*args, &args.pop)
should pass all elements of args (jeremyevans0)- Bug is due to an optimization that skips duping of args for the splat.
- I created a patch that fixes the issue in most cases by removing the optimization in those cases.
- The patch does not remove the optimization in common cases, such as
&local_variable
or&:symbol
- Truly fixing the issue in all cases requires removing the optimization completely.
- Is it OK to merge the patch?
- [Feature #16470] Issue with nanoseconds in Time#inspect (jeremyevans0)
- Currently, Time#inspect can display fractional seconds as a rational, which few rational people want.
- I think Time#inspect should always display fractional seconds as decimal.
- I have a patch to do this, but it makes Time#inspect the same for Time instances that are not equal.
- Arbitrary precision for fractional seconds, the benefit of storing nanoseconds as a rational, seems pointless to me.
- Do we want to keep things as is, merge the patch, or change Time's implementation so fractional seconds are not stored with greater than nanosecond precision?
Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16378] Support leading arguments together with ... (eregon)
- Already accepted for master, could someone review the PR from Jeremy?
- Could we backport it to 2.7.2? So then there is a non-
ruby2_keywords
and long-term way to do delegation for more cases.
Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16897] General purpose memoizer in Ruby 3 with Ruby 2 performance (eregon)
- Thoughts about the ***args / Arguments proposal?
- Ideas to optimize delegation with
*args, **kwargs
better, which it seems most people expect (it's intuitive, same as Python) is the Ruby 3 way to do delegation? - Some other ideas to optimize memoization, maybe using
...
?
Updated by dsisnero (Dominic Sisneros) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #14722] python's buffer protocol clone (dsisnero)
- many C-extensions that use large buffer like objects in C - Numo::Narray , NMatrix, red-arrow, but to transfer between them and ruby usually copy the data to go between types
- create a c-api to describe the shape and access of the data to avoid copying data
- maybe use the arrow c data interface https://arrow.apache.org/docs/format/CDataInterface.html
Updated by dsisnero (Dominic Sisneros) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #12901] Anonymous functions without scope lookup overhead. (dsisnero)
-
this allows performance bump
-
also can allow to serialize functions - #11630 or (isolated procs)
-
can add multi-method variant if adding new syntax
func add(x,y){ x + y} mfunc add(x: Int, y: Int){ __intrinsic__.int_add(x,y) mfunc add(x: String, y: String){ __instinsic__.string_add(x,y)}
-
Updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) over 4 years ago
- [Bug #14541] Class variables have broken semantics, let's fix them (jeremyevans0)
- My previous commit to fix this only raised in verbose mode, since the class variable overtaken warning was only issued in verbose mode.
- Are we OK jumping directly from verbose-mode warning in 2.7 to RuntimeError in 3.0, or do we want to issue a warning even in non-verbose mode in 3.0 and switch to RuntimeError in 3.1?
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16950] Stop nonsense keyword argument warnings in 2.6 (mame)
- 2.6 produces a warning that no longer makes sense. Unfortunately, this warning is not only unhelpful but also annoying for supporting 3.0 keyword behavior (according to some Rails developers). This is a change for 2.6, but how about deleting the warning?
Updated by connorshea (Connor Shea) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16456] Ruby 2.7 argument delegation (
...
) should be its own kind of parameter inMethod#parameters
(aaronc81)- Right now, the
parameters
method returns[[:rest, :*], [:block, :&]]
if a method uses the...
syntax. - It'd be nice if the returned array were more clear about the method using
...
. - Can we change the returned values to something like
[:rest, :"..."], [:block, :"..."]]
, especially now that...
can be used after other parameters?
- Right now, the
Updated by k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun) over 4 years ago
- [Misc #16961] Is overriding a method in a subclass considered as a breaking change or not? (k0kubun)
- Is it acceptable to override
Integer#zero?
which is currently handled byNumeric#zero?
to optimize it on MJIT? - How should we make this kind of decision? (the main topic of the ticket)
- Is it acceptable to override
Updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #15822] Add Hash#except (zverok)
- Last time it was discussed, Matz asked "We didn't see the need for Hash#except yet. Any (real world use-case)? I don't think the name except is the best name for the behavior." In the ticket's new comments, I am providing use cases and name justification.
- I vaguely remember already adding it to some previous meetings agenda, but I don't see any outcome in the ticket
Updated by byroot (Jean Boussier) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16848] Allow callables in $LOAD_PATH (byroot)
- I added a proposal for the "loader" interface based on two methods:
find_feature
andload_feature
. - A couple solutions for the
$LOAD_PATH
backward compatibility concern were proposed (maintaining a distinct$FEATURE_LOADERS
array). - I'd like to really question the importance of that compatibility issue. It would certainly require some code to be updated, but wouldn't break any use case.
- More generally I'd like to know what I could do to help move this forward.
- I added a proposal for the "loader" interface based on two methods:
Updated by mrkn (Kenta Murata) over 4 years ago
- [Feature #16812] Allow slicing arrays with ArithmeticSequence
- I found the inconsistency between the existing behaviors:
[*0..10][-100..100]
vs[*0..10][..100]
. - I believe it is better to fix the behavior of
[*0..10][-100..100]
.
- I found the inconsistency between the existing behaviors:
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) over 4 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Closed
Actions
Like0
Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0