Ruby Issue Tracking System

01/07/2018

09:26 AM Ruby trunk Feature #12589: VM performance improvement proposal

vmakarov (Vladimir Makarov) wrote:
> For example, GCC/LLVM optimizes well int->fixnum->int->... conversions but they...

01:55 AM Ruby trunk Bug #14069: Document order of elements in Set

*Is* that actually guaranteed by the specification? Can you point to any specification or documentation or official s...

01:50 AM Ruby trunk Misc #13968: [Ruby 3.x perhaps] - A (minimal?) static variant of ruby

Just to make sure I understand what you are talking about, when you write "Ruby", do you *really* mean "Ruby", or do ...

10/06/2017

12:53 AM Ruby trunk Feature #12115: Add Symbol#call to allow to_proc shorthand with arguments

knu (Akinori MUSHA) wrote:
> Wouldn't Array#to_proc make sense?
>
> ```ruby
> class Array
> def to_proc
> ...

05/13/2017

07:01 PM Ruby trunk Feature #10548: remove callcc (Callcc is now going obsoleted. Please use Fiber.)

jphelps (Jeremy Phelps) wrote:
> I just learned that Ruby has continuations. Then I learned that they're considered ...

03/31/2017

08:04 AM Ruby trunk Feature #13166: Feature Request: Byte Arrays for Ruby 3

I agree that the OP probably is more interested in a `BitVector`/`BitArray` than a `ByteArray`, at least for the spec...

01/25/2017

03:28 AM Ruby trunk Feature #12901: Anonymous functions without scope lookup overhead

I have thought about this a number of times, but never got around to writing a feature request: we already have a way...

03:13 AM Ruby trunk Feature #12901: Anonymous functions without scope lookup overhead

Jeremy Evans wrote:
> It would probably be better if ruby could do analysis and if there are no references to local ...

12/27/2016

12:51 AM Ruby trunk Bug #13064: Inconsistent behavior with `next` inside `begin`/`end` across different implementations.

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> It's a REPL implementation dependent (irb uses eval() inside). Try comparing them using ...

12/23/2016

04:07 PM Ruby trunk Bug #13064 (Feedback): Inconsistent behavior with `next` inside `begin`/`end` across different implementations.

[@Kalsan over on StackOverflow observed inconsistent behavior](http://stackoverflow.com/q/41283514/2988) with `next` ...