I personally don't mind `dig!`. I interpret the `!` as a general sign of caution, rather than some meaning specific to data structures (ie. self-modification). But, if we can't have `dig!`, how about `fetch_dig` or `dig_fetch`? Whatever...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
peterzhu2118 (Peter Zhu) wrote in #note-1: > Thank you for the report. It's a duplicate of #17780 which has been flagged for backport. In the meantime you can use 2.7.2 or build from the [2.7 branch](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/tree/ru...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
The spirit of ruby is to make programmers happy. So, if logical implication would make programmers happy, we must consider it. It doesn't matter if it's infrequently used. For example, `Array#zip` is rarely used, but it makes me very hap...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
Thanks for the response, Robert. It would be great if the error message provided that level of detail. However, that may be difficult to implement. So, maybe we should focus on simply improving the text of the existing warning. My goal i...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
The warning currently reads: `loading in progress, circular require considered harmful - /my/file.rb` I think it would be more helpful like: `Circular require: Loading of /my/file.rb is already in progress, but require was calle...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
Feel free to close this. I haven't used ruby 2.0 in a while. All of my projects are using 2.1 or 2.2. I don't think I have access to close this.jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
~~~ Ruby 2.0 already has RUBY_VM_FIBER_VM_STACK_SIZE RUBY_FIBER_MACHINE_STACK_SIZE ~~~ Are these environment variables to configure the stack size? Is there documentation on usage? (I mean, what are the units? bytes, kb?) Is th...jaredbeck (Jared Beck)
jaredbeck (Jared Beck)08:18 PM Ruby Feature #14602: Version of dig that raises error if a key is not present