Forum: Ruby ParseTree 3.0.3 Released

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Ryan D. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 01:39
(Received via mailing list)
ParseTree version 3.0.3 has been released!

* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/parsetree/>
* <http://www.zenspider.com/ZSS/Products/ParseTree/>
* <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>

ParseTree is a C extension (using RubyInline) that extracts the parse
tree for an entire class or a specific method and returns it as a
s-expression (aka sexp) using ruby's arrays, strings, symbols, and
integers.

As an example:

   def conditional1(arg1)
     if arg1 == 0 then
       return 1
     end
     return 0
   end

becomes:

   [:defn,
     :conditional1,
     [:scope,
      [:block,
       [:args, :arg1],
       [:if,
        [:call, [:lvar, :arg1], :==, [:array, [:lit, 0]]],
        [:return, [:lit, 1]],
        nil],
       [:return, [:lit, 0]]]]]

Changes:

### 3.0.3 / 2009-01-20

* 4 bug fixes:

   * Added gauntlet_parsetree.rb. Bug finding/fixing much faster &
easier now.
   * Fixed alias tests for r2r. Added masgn and heredoc tests.
   * Fixed conflicting flags (-u vs -r).
   * Unwrap RHS from array IF it is only a splat node.

* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/parsetree/>
* <http://www.zenspider.com/ZSS/Products/ParseTree/>
* <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
Luis L. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 02:00
(Received via mailing list)
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Ryan D. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:
> integers.
> becomes:
>       [:return, [:lit, 0]]]]]
>   * Fixed conflicting flags (-u vs -r).
>   * Unwrap RHS from array IF it is only a splat node.
>
> * <http://rubyforge.org/projects/parsetree/>
> * <http://www.zenspider.com/ZSS/Products/ParseTree/>
> * <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
>

Just added Windows binaries compatible with One-Click Installer to
RubyForge:

704 tests, 3411 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors

Regards,
Ryan D. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 02:18
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 20, 2009, at 16:00 , Luis L. wrote:

> Just added Windows binaries compatible with One-Click Installer to
> RubyForge:
>
> 704 tests, 3411 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors

awesome! thank you!
Phlip (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 20:00
(Received via mailing list)
> Just added Windows binaries compatible with One-Click Installer to RubyForge:

How is CygWin doing?
Luis L. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 21:11
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 3:54 pm, Phlip <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > Just added Windows binaries compatible with One-Click Installer to RubyForge:
>
> How is CygWin doing?

If you have installed the build tools (gcc and such) then using
RubyInline and ParseTree shouldn't be much problem for you.

Slow, yes, but maybe not lot of problems :-)
Ryan D. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 21:18
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 2009, at 11:08 , Luis L. wrote:

> On Jan 21, 3:54 pm, Phlip <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>> Just added Windows binaries compatible with One-Click Installer to
>>> RubyForge:
>>
>> How is CygWin doing?
>
> If you have installed the build tools (gcc and such) then using
> RubyInline and ParseTree shouldn't be much problem for you.
>
> Slow, yes, but maybe not lot of problems :-)

why is it slow? I did it once on a whim and didn't notice a
compilation time iirc... does it not cache the dll?
Phlip (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 21:45
(Received via mailing list)
Luis L. wrote:

>> How is CygWin doing?
>
> If you have installed the build tools (gcc and such) then using
> RubyInline and ParseTree shouldn't be much problem for you.
>
> Slow, yes, but maybe not lot of problems :-)

When I tried (please don't ask me to reproduce the bug because I have
moved on,
and it should be easy), RubyInline kept getting stuck trying to rewrite
its
library at ~/.ruby_inline/blah_RubyInline_blah.so.

The blah is not important because the root problem was something left
zombie
ruby.exe processes in memory - they apparently locked their previous .so
files.

(And will Ruby1.9's ParseTree use RubyInline or Ripper?)
Ryan D. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 22:28
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 2009, at 11:43 , Phlip wrote:

> (And will Ruby1.9's ParseTree use RubyInline or Ripper?)

There is no ruby 1.9 ParseTree.
Luis L. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 22:50
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 5:13 pm, Ryan D. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Slow, yes, but maybe not lot of problems :-)
>
> why is it slow? I did it once on a whim and didn't notice a  
> compilation time iirc... does it not cache the dll?

Ruby cygwin is sensible slower than native (mingw based) Ruby.
Luis L. (Guest)
on 2009-01-21 22:51
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 21, 5:42 pm, Phlip <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> library at ~/.ruby_inline/blah_RubyInline_blah.so.
>

Well, cannot say about cygwin, I don't have it installed nor plan to
do it.

> The blah is not important because the root problem was something left zombie
> ruby.exe processes in memory - they apparently locked their previous .so files.

Ah, that Windows IO. file descriptors open (zombies) locks the files,
and you cannot remove or anything.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.