The Ruby Core forum has no new entry since four days ago.
Is it closed, broken ?
_md
Michel D. wrote:
The Ruby Core forum has no new entry since four days ago.
Is it closed, broken ?
When you say “forum” do you mean ruby-forum.com? That’s just a mirror of
the mailing list, which you can find at
Mailing Lists
Follow the “archives” link to the official archive, there seems to be
reasonable level of activity in the last few days. So I suspect it’s
just the ruby-forum.com gateway which is broken.
I have to say, the traffic on ruby-talk visible on ruby-forum.com has
dropped to a trickle too. I suspect we’re only seeing things posted
directly here, rather than via the mailing list.
Brian C. wrote:
Michel D. wrote:
The Ruby Core forum has no new entry since four days ago.
Is it closed, broken ?When you say “forum” do you mean ruby-forum.com?
Yes
So I suspect it’s
just the ruby-forum.com gateway which is broken.
You must be right. Thanks.
BTW, Brian, do you have any idea about my post of two days ago (method
lookup) ?
_md
Brian C. wrote:
Michel D. wrote:
So I suspect it’s
just the ruby-forum.com gateway which is broken.
More : apparently the ruby core archives are also blocked at June 10th.
_md
Michel D. wrote:
BTW, Brian, do you have any idea about my post of two days ago (method
lookup) ?
You mean Strange thing with method lookup - Ruby - Ruby-Forum ?
No. I stay well clear of ruby 1.9.x.
ISTR that Rails 3 beta causes 1.9.1 to segfault, but it works with the
(unreleased) 1.9.2. So perhaps you could try one of the 1.9.2 previews.
Brian C. wrote:
Michel D. wrote:
BTW, Brian, do you have any idea about my post of two days ago (method
lookup) ?You mean Strange thing with method lookup - Ruby - Ruby-Forum ?
Yes
No. I stay well clear of ruby 1.9.x.
I switched sometime ago to 1.9 and my app now uses ordered hashes and
enumerators.
So perhaps you could try one of the 1.9.2 previews.
For the time being, it works with the strange ::Fixnum fix. I cross
fingers and shall try 1.9.2 later on, when officially released. But
1.9.2 implies (or is it 1.9.x ?) - alas poor Yorick! - changing
Regexp’s : \d, \s,\w and the like work no more with utf-8 encodings!
_md
Michel D. wrote:
I switched sometime ago to 1.9 and my app now uses ordered hashes and
enumerators.
Certainly there are cool new features in 1.9, and apparently improved
speed. But these are outweighed for me by the total mess which is
encodings.
But
1.9.2 implies (or is it 1.9.x ?) - alas poor Yorick! - changing
Regexp’s : \d, \s,\w and the like work no more with utf-8 encodings!
Care to share an example, or point to a blog with more details? I have
an older 1.9.2 lying around, it doesn’t seem to behave how you describe.
RUBY_DESCRIPTION
=> “ruby 1.9.2dev (2009-07-18 trunk 24186) [i686-linux]”a = “groß 123 über”
=> “groß 123 über”a.encoding
=> #Encoding:UTF-8a =~ /(\d+)/
=> 5$1
=> “123”a =~ /(\w+)/
=> 0$1
=> “groß”
Brian C. wrote:
Michel D. wrote:
I switched sometime ago to 1.9 and my app now uses ordered hashes and
enumerators.Certainly there are cool new features in 1.9, and apparently improved
speed. But these are outweighed for me by the total mess which is
encodings.But
1.9.2 implies (or is it 1.9.x ?) - alas poor Yorick! - changing
Regexp’s : \d, \s,\w and the like work no more with utf-8 encodings!Care to share an example, or point to a blog with more details?
It was written in a post in this forum (or ruby core) I think from
Yusuke E. about the coming 1.9.2 release. You have to replace \d by
\p{Digit}, and similarly for \s, and the like… Sad perspective.
Look at the beautiful example !
RangeReg =
/\A(\p{Digit}+|\p{Digit}+..\p{Digit}+)(,\p{Space}(\p{Digit}+|\p{Digit}+..\p{Digit}+))\Z/
Michel D. wrote:
Look at the beautiful example !
RangeReg =
/\A(\p{Digit}+|\p{Digit}+..\p{Digit}+)(,\p{Space}(\p{Digit}+|\p{Digit}+..\p{Digit}+))\Z/
I think I’ll add a Regexp#one_nine_two_escape method!
_md
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Brian C. [email protected]
wrote:
$1
=> “groß”
i think you caught the last one,
RUBY_DESCRIPTION
=> “ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-05-31 revision 28117) [i686-linux]”
a = “groß 123 über”
=> “groß 123
über”> a.encoding
=> #Encoding:UTF-8
a =~ /(\w+)/
=> 0
$1
=> “gro”
$’
=> “ß 123
über”
kind regards -botp
unknown wrote:
http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_9_2_preview3/NEWS
- \d, \s, and \w are now ASCII only; use POSIX bracket classes and \p{}
for
Unicode semantics
Yes, that was this post.
_md
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Brian C. [email protected]
wrote:
Regexp’s : \d, \s,\w and the like work no more with utf-8 encodings!
Care to share an example, or point to a blog with more details? I have
an older 1.9.2 lying around, it doesn’t seem to behave how you describe.
http://svn.ruby-lang.org/repos/ruby/tags/v1_9_2_preview3/NEWS
- \d, \s, and \w are now ASCII only; use POSIX bracket classes and \p{}
for
Unicode semantics
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/3376
The rationale is that many people expects \d and \s to match ASCII only.
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/3376
The rationale is that many people expects \d and \s to match ASCII only.
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/30543
For your convenience, I tell you two well-known incompatibilities:
-
\d, \s and \w in Regexp does match only ASCII characters.
Especially, \w does NOT match with accented character, umlaut,
etc. In other words, it behaves the same as 1.8.coding: UTF-8
p(/\w/ =~ “a”) #=> nil
If you want Unicode sensitive character class, you can use
\p{Digit} instead of \d, \p{Space} instead of \s, and \p{Word}
or [\w\P{ASCII}] instead of \w.
Brian C. wrote:
So I suspect it’s
just the ruby-forum.com gateway which is broken.
It was, but it’s fixed now and all posts have been added. Sorry for the
inconvenience.
Michel D. wrote:
A reference on POSIX classes :