> But all these applications have to pay for longer startup time, higher memory and disk consumption. All these are not negligible in the age of cloud. I am pretty sure there is also performance hit during exception handling. Then, a ...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
I want to make point for the default gem promotion. One of Ruby's goal is to be very appealing to developers. did_you_mean is very helpful in this regard. As are well written error messages. Or source_locations of Ruby methods. Or a w...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
I have added a short notice for people interested to https://stdgems.org/webrick/#notes Btw, do you use a tool assisting with merging the upstream changes? If not I'd offer to build one (not totally automated, but might be helpful for...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
The latest security releases of Ruby include some fixes in the webrick default gem: - https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2019/10/01/webrick-regexp-digestauth-dos-cve-2019-16201/ - https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2019/10/01/http-resp...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
Although Ruby has many core methods for retrieving the list of methods available to an object, or to the instances of a class, I believe they have gotten a little confusing ([also see](https://idiosyncratic-ruby.com/25-meta-methodology.h...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
Thank you for the feedback. In the GH issue the general opinion is to have a single README file with all the info. duerst (Martin Dürst) wrote: > > ... This is correct, although it might not be overly complex. If I understood hsbt c...rbjl (Jan Lelis)
As an example, I've created such a "default gem explanation" file as PR to the matrix library, see here: https://github.com/ruby/matrix/pull/7/files What do you all think about this approach?rbjl (Jan Lelis)
I'd like to help out, too. Maybe we can have a second file `README-DEFAULT-GEM.md` which is linked to by the `README.md`. The `README-DEFAULT-GEM` would explain how default gems work etc. and would be same for all default gems and wou...rbjl (Jan Lelis)