"Native" Zlib Implementation Patch

A patch implementing Zlib decompression (with GZip decompression
support) as a built in library has been submitted to RubyForge:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=19711&group_id=4359&atid=16800
. It’s quite a bit faster then trying to use Zliby (this is
essentially a port of that). It works, though binary files seem to be
causing some problem, I suspect it’s because of the differences in
Unicode Strings in the CLR vs non-Unicode strings in ruby 1.8.6.
Anyway, it’s a start.


Michael L.
[Polymath Prokrammer]
http://blog.prokrams.com

Michael L.:

“Native” Zlib Implementation Patch

Thanks for sending this in!

FYI - a few quick pointers about your contribution. No need to take any
action since I’ve fixed most of them on my machine already.

  1. Bangs

Please do your best to incorporate the bangs in your contributions. The
bangs indicate a non-nullable reference type. I find that it’s best if
you create a VS macro to insert them - I bind this macro to the CTRL-!
key:

Sub InsertBang()
DTE.ActiveDocument.Selection.Text = “/!/”
End Sub

This helps to reinforce in your mind (and in the mind of the code
reviewer) whether a given reference type is non-nullable or not. This
will also greatly help us out when we start running spec# for real
across our codebase to look for violations of this contract.

Generally you’ll find that any time you get a CodeContext from us it’s
guaranteed to not be null, which means that you don’t have to do a null
check. The converse is also true - if you have a nullable reference
type, you’ll need to validate it with one of the helpers in our
Microsoft.Scripting.ContractUtils class.

  1. General formatting issues

Please do try and stick with .NET naming conventions if possible when
porting code from Java etc. I realize that it does take time to do this,
and thanks, but it’s either you do it or I have to :slight_smile: Not a big deal
since I can just do a CTRL-K CTRL-F on your code, but it would rock if
you could format along the same lines as the rest of the code.

  1. Testing / coverage

If possible please let us know how many specs from the spec suite your
code passes etc. That would help us determine how much to look into the
codebase itself.

Thanks,
-John

The rubinius specs for Zlib are… wanting. Though there are some.
Are the rubinius specs used as is?

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:08 PM, John L. (IRONRUBY)
[email protected] wrote:

Please do your best to incorporate the bangs in your contributions. The bangs indicate a non-nullable reference type. I find that it’s best if you create a VS macro to insert them - I bind this macro to the CTRL-! key:

Ironruby-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core


Michael L.
[Polymath Prokrammer]
http://blog.prokrams.com

Michael L.:

The rubinius specs for Zlib are… wanting. Though there are some.
Are the rubinius specs used as is?

Just peeked at the latest rubinius specs and there is some coverage. I’m
going to start working on running the latest rubinius spec runner in my
next checkin.

-John

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs