Project

General

Profile

Actions

Misc #20628

closed

DevMeeting-2024-08-01

Added by mame (Yusuke Endoh) 4 months ago. Updated 4 months ago.

Status:
Closed
Assignee:
-
[ruby-core:118556]

Description

The next dev meeting

Date: 2024/08/01 13:00-17:00 (JST)
Log: https://github.com/ruby/dev-meeting-log/blob/master/2024/DevMeeting-2024-08-01.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 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.
  • 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.
  • It is recommended to add a comment by 2024/07/29. We hold a preparatory meeting to create an agenda a few days before the dev-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. We appreciate it if you could write a short summary and update from a previous discussion.

Related issues 1 (1 open0 closed)

Related to Ruby master - Misc #14770: [META] DevelopersMeetingOpenActions
Actions #1

Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) 4 months ago

  • Related to Misc #14770: [META] DevelopersMeeting added

Updated by byroot (Jean Boussier) 4 months ago

  • [Feature #20590] Ensure fork isn't called when raddrinfo's background thread is in getaddrinfo (byroot)

    • Full rationale in the ticket, too large to copy here.
    • I understand that this solution is quite unorthodox, but I think it would solve a lot of problems for many people.
    • I'm interested in feedback about the approach.
    • It can introduce latency in fork, but fork is rarely very time sensitive.
  • [Feature #20594] A new String method to append bytes while preserving encoding (byroot)

    • The idea was accepted in the last meeting, but a better name was requested.
    • I think two methods would be best.
    • String#append_bytes(String) => self
    • String#append_byte(Integer) => self

Updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev) 4 months ago

  • [Feature #18368] Range#step semantics for non-Numeric ranges (zverok)
    • The feature was approved a year ago by @matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) but the PR doesn’t receive any review/comments/answers. Not sure what I should do to move forward, so submitting it to the dev. meeting.

Updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) 4 months ago

  • [Bug #20620] singleton_method undefined for module using "extend self" (jeremyevans0)
    • I believe this is expected behavior and the bug can be rejected, is that correct?
    • I think it is unfortunate that the all argument to singleton_methods defaults to true, but I don't think it's worth breaking backwards compatibility to change it.
  • [Bug #20637] SyntaxError class definition in method body can be bypassed (jeremyevans0)
    • Is this expected behavior, or a bug?
    • If this is considered a bug, I expect fixing it may result in significant backwards compatibility issues.
  • [Bug #19231] Integer#step and Float::INFINITY - inconsistent behaviour when called with and without a block (jeremyevans0)
    • Returns float without block, yields integer with block.
    • Behavior should probably be consistent.
    • I think it's would make the most sense to always return and yield integer if step is integer, because Integer + Integer should result in Integer.
    • However, with non-infinite float as the to value, it returns and yields floats, so returning/yielding integer would be inconsistent with that.
    • How should this be handled?
Actions #5

Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) 4 months ago

  • Description updated (diff)
  • Status changed from Open to Closed
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF

Like0
Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0