Issue #4970 has been reported by Thomas Sawyer. ---------------------------------------- Feature #4970: FileUtils refactored http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/4970 Author: Thomas Sawyer Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: 1.9.x I've been working with FileUtils a good bit, and concluded it could use some refactoring to make the code clearer and easier to work with. Here is the pull request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/30 Essentially, I have removed the method definition loops that occur at the end of the script and replaced them with a simple call (`define_command`) made for each command as it is defined. This allowed me to use `extend self` all the way through, rather than having to use `module_function` in FileUtils and `extend self` in the Verbose, NoWrite and DryRun "submodules".
on 2011-07-04 01:56
on 2011-12-28 03:55
Issue #4970 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer. Is current trunk destined to be 2.0? If so, can this get a review and merge if ok? ---------------------------------------- Feature #4970: FileUtils refactored https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4970 Author: Thomas Sawyer Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: 2.0.0 I've been working with FileUtils a good bit, and concluded it could use some refactoring to make the code clearer and easier to work with. Here is the pull request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/30 Essentially, I have removed the method definition loops that occur at the end of the script and replaced them with a simple call (`define_command`) made for each command as it is defined. This allowed me to use `extend self` all the way through, rather than having to use `module_function` in FileUtils and `extend self` in the Verbose, NoWrite and DryRun "submodules".
on 2011-12-28 04:37
Hi,
In message "Re: [ruby-core:41834] [ruby-trunk - Feature #4970] FileUtils
refactored"
on Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:54:52 +0900, Thomas Sawyer
<transfire@gmail.com> writes:
|Is current trunk destined to be 2.0? If so, can this get a review and merge if
ok?
Current trunk is to be 2.0. Is anyone willing to review the code?
matz.
on 2012-02-15 18:26
Issue #4970 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer. Aaron Patterson looked at it, his only remarks were that I forgot to remove a spurious comment and that I changed the indention on `private`. Since, he said nothing about the implementation itself, I am assuming it looked okay to him. I would remove the unnecessary comment myself, but I seem to have deleted the repo I was working on, and I am not sure there is a way to get it back such that I can update the same pull request. It would just be easier to merge then remove the comment, and if deemed necessary, rebase to a single commit. ---------------------------------------- Feature #4970: FileUtils refactored https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4970 Author: Thomas Sawyer Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: 2.0.0 I've been working with FileUtils a good bit, and concluded it could use some refactoring to make the code clearer and easier to work with. Here is the pull request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/30 Essentially, I have removed the method definition loops that occur at the end of the script and replaced them with a simple call (`define_command`) made for each command as it is defined. This allowed me to use `extend self` all the way through, rather than having to use `module_function` in FileUtils and `extend self` in the Verbose, NoWrite and DryRun "submodules".
on 2012-02-15 19:05
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 02:26:10AM +0900, Thomas Sawyer wrote: > > Issue #4970 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer. > > > Aaron Patterson looked at it, his only remarks were that I forgot to remove a spurious comment and that I changed the indention on `private`. Since, he said nothing about the implementation itself, I am assuming it looked okay to him. Ya, I think it's basically fine. I have a few more questions that I'll add to the diff. Sorry it's taking me so long to respond on this. :( > I would remove the unnecessary comment myself, but I seem to have deleted the repo I was working on, and I am not sure there is a way to get it back such that I can update the same pull request. It would just be easier to merge then remove the comment, and if deemed necessary, rebase to a single commit. I don't think it matters too much. Once we have the final patch assembled, I can just apply to trunk without the pull request.
on 2012-02-15 19:40
Hello,
2012/2/16 Aaron Patterson <tenderlove@ruby-lang.org>:
> Ya, I think it's basically fine.
Agreed. Also looks good to me. Thanks.
on 2012-02-18 02:44
Issue #4970 has been updated by Hiroshi Shirosaki.
r34669 (trunk): * lib/fileutils.rb: refactored FileUtil methods
seems to cause test errors with mingw32.
TestDir_M17N#test_filename_as_bytes_extutf8 = 0.12 s = E
TestDir_M17N#test_filename_extutf8_inteucjp_unrepresentable = 0.18 s = E
This patch reverts a line to the original code and fixes errors.
diff --git a/lib/fileutils.rb b/lib/fileutils.rb
index 8d1009b..46dfffb 100644
--- a/lib/fileutils.rb
+++ b/lib/fileutils.rb
@@ -1342,7 +1342,7 @@ private
def entries
opts = {}
- opts[:encoding] = "UTF-8" if /mswin|mignw/ =~ RUBY_PLATFORM
+ opts[:encoding] = ::Encoding::UTF_8 if fu_windows?
Dir.entries(path(), opts)\
.reject {|n| n == '.' or n == '..' }\
.map {|n| Entry_.new(prefix(), join(rel(), n.untaint)) }
----------------------------------------
Feature #4970: FileUtils refactored
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4970
Author: Thomas Sawyer
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Target version: 2.0.0
I've been working with FileUtils a good bit, and concluded it could use
some refactoring to make the code clearer and easier to work with. Here
is the pull request:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/30
Essentially, I have removed the method definition loops that occur at
the end of the script and replaced them with a simple call
(`define_command`) made for each command as it is defined. This allowed
me to use `extend self` all the way through, rather than having to use
`module_function` in FileUtils and `extend self` in the Verbose, NoWrite
and DryRun "submodules".
on 2012-02-18 06:56
Issue #4970 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer. Looks like someone had simply misspelled "mignw". I am guessing that's actually the older code, and `fu_windows?` is the newer. Is that right? The refactoring I did did not touch that line, so I am guessing it was changed between the time I wrote the refactor and now --which could be since 1) it was a number of months ago and 2) I lost my original branch and had to reconstruct the the whole file and resubmit. ---------------------------------------- Feature #4970: FileUtils refactored https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4970 Author: Thomas Sawyer Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: 2.0.0 I've been working with FileUtils a good bit, and concluded it could use some refactoring to make the code clearer and easier to work with. Here is the pull request: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/30 Essentially, I have removed the method definition loops that occur at the end of the script and replaced them with a simple call (`define_command`) made for each command as it is defined. This allowed me to use `extend self` all the way through, rather than having to use `module_function` in FileUtils and `extend self` in the Verbose, NoWrite and DryRun "submodules".
on 2012-02-18 17:42
(12/02/18 14:56), Thomas Sawyer wrote:
> Looks like someone had simply misspelled "mignw". I am guessing that's actually
the older code, and `fu_windows?` is the newer. Is that right?
Right. I fixed it at r34146, in the last December.
Enable email notification
Enable multi-page viewPlease log in before posting. Registration is free and takes only a minute.
Existing account
(Switch to SSL-encrypted connection)
NEW: Do you have a Google/GoogleMail or Yahoo account? No registration required!
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account
No account? Register here.