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 record of the discussion in the 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 of the meeting are scheduled according to when/where we can reserve Matz's time.
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.
It is recommended to add a comment by 2024/02/11. We hold a preparatory meeting to create an agenda a few days before the dev-meeting.
Your comment is mandatory. We cannot read all discussion of the ticket in a limited time. We appreciate it if you could write a short summary and update from a previous discussion.
[Bug #20203] TestEnumerable test failures with GCC 14
Using qsort_r to sort causes corruption when the comparison function is reentered using continuation/fiber and when using GC compaction due to undefined behavior
[Feature #20205] Enable frozen_string_literal by default (byroot)
A proposed migration plan for allowing to enable frozen_string_literal by default in the future.
Introduce "chilled strings", they behave like frozen strings, but on mutation they emit a deprecation warning and become regular mutable strings again.
[Bug #20218] aset/masgn/op_asgn with keyword arguments (jeremyevans0)
Do we want to make it a syntax error to pass keyword arguments in these cases?
There was already a desire to make passing blocks in these cases a syntax error (see #19918)?
If keyword arguments should be allowed, should we treat keywords as keywords or as positional arguments (currently: aset treats as positional, op_asgn treats as keywords)?
[Bug #20229] Empty keyword splat in array not removed in ARGSPUSH case (jeremyevans0)
Is it OK to fix this as part of an optimization that adds pushtoarraykwsplat instruction?
I want to have a chance to explain new Ripper's architecture.
In short, Ripper uses semantic value stack to manage Ruby Object returned by Ripper callback methods then Ripper can't execute semantic analysis which needs AST Node. New architecture enables it by adding another stack to Ripper parser with Lrama's update.