@Michael Hm, good catch, I hadn't thought of that. In that case it indeed looks like I was misunderstanding the documentation. I'll work on the specs to confirm or rule this out.yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
When creating a new `Addrinfo` instance the `new` class method appears to ignore the 2nd (afamily) argument and always sets it to `AF_INET`. Some examples: Socket::AF_INET # => 2 Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localh...yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
By the way, this was tested using `ruby 2.2.0p0 (2014-12-25 revision 49005) [x86_64-linux]` on Arch Linux (`Linux yorickpeterse-macbook-olery 3.17.6-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Dec 7 23:43:32 UTC 2014 x86_64 GNU/Linux`).yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
The documentation of Addrinfo.new states the following: > family is specified as an integer to specify the protocol family such as > ... However, the behaviour contradicts this: Addrinfo.new(Socket.sockaddr_in(80, 'localhost')...yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
It's fine for the methods to do different things, the naming however is a bit confusing. Using `path` doesn't clearly state when it's absolute and when it's relative. Perhaps `script_path` would make more sense. Merging the two is a...yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
Benoit: correct, I just found this out by messing around more with this. This behaviour is extremely confusing, especially since the tests both just compare if `path` and `absolute_path` equal `__FILE__`. Perhaps the Tempfile code i...yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
Nobu: I talked about this with Koichi today after noticing you added tests for path/absolute_path after my talk at FOSDEM. Since these tests assert that path returns the full path I'd like to know which one is correct. Is it this: ...yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)
yorickpeterse (Yorick Peterse)10:06 AM Ruby Misc #10907: Documentation of Addrinfo.new suggests default family of PF_UNSPEC while in practise it appears to be AF_INET