RubySpecs

I’ve just run mspec under the Languages\Ruby\Tests\mspec\rubyspec\core
folder against MRI 1.9.2p0 (which is checked into the ironlanguages-main
git repo), and it crashes with a segfault in putc_spec.rb

I then tried running against MRI 1.9.2p290 and I get the following:

   1518 files, 9618 examples, 28229 expectations, 339 failures, 256

errors

Running against the dev build of IronRuby stalls running tests in the
array subfolder, so I can’t even complete the run.

I’d like to try fixing some of the spec failures that IronRuby has, but
these results raise several questions:

  1. Are the specs in the mspec\rubyspec folder up to date? How would
    someone find this out and/or update them?
  • Also, I added a few specs the other day for the marshalling code. Do
    these need to somehow get pushed upstream into some “master” rubyspec
    repository??
  1. Shouldn’t we check the latest build of MRI into the ironlangauges
    git-repo? Either the latest 1.9.2 or the just-released 1.9.3 instead?

  2. Isn’t MRI the “definitive” ruby? How can the specs be failing against
    MRI?

  3. If I update some IronRuby code to pass the specs, how do I know that
    the specs are even correct?

Thanks, Orion

  1. Partly. We are in progress of updating them. Since we’ve added more
    specs and sometimes corrected existing ones this needs to be done with
    care. The current progress is captured here:

https://gist.github.com/1159998

After we are done with this process of bringing the specs up to date we
can submit a path to RubySpec containing the changed we made. The plan
is also to make the RubySpec dir a submodule so that merging with
RubySpec is easier.

  1. Or maybe we should just remove MRI completely? You can always use one
    on your system. I need to check if we need CRuby for anything in the
    infrastructure.

  2. Well, that would be a question for RubySpec maintainers. I found some
    specs be failures Windows specific, which means the specs are not
    properly written. Feel free to contribute to RubySpecs git repo - I bet
    they are happy to accept fixes.

  3. Well, you need to figure out if the behavior makes sense. If it
    doesn’t feel free to file a bug on CRuby and let them decide if the
    behavior is intentional or not. Then CRuby might get fixed, specs might
    get fixed, or IronRuby might get fixed.

Which specs particularly are you working on? Is it marshal related?

Tomas

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs

I’ve just run mspec under the Languages\Ruby\Tests\mspec\rubyspec\core
folder against MRI 1.9.2p0 (which is checked into the ironlanguages-main
git repo), and it crashes with a segfault in putc_spec.rb

I then tried running against MRI 1.9.2p290 and I get the following:

   1518 files, 9618 examples, 28229 expectations, 339 failures, 256 

errors

Running against the dev build of IronRuby stalls running tests in the
array subfolder, so I can’t even complete the run.

I’d like to try fixing some of the spec failures that IronRuby has, but
these results raise several questions:

  1. Are the specs in the mspec\rubyspec folder up to date? How would
    someone find this out and/or update them?
  • Also, I added a few specs the other day for the marshalling code. Do
    these need to somehow get pushed upstream into some “master” rubyspec
    repository??
  1. Shouldn’t we check the latest build of MRI into the ironlangauges
    git-repo? Either the latest 1.9.2 or the just-released 1.9.3 instead?

  2. Isn’t MRI the “definitive” ruby? How can the specs be failing against
    MRI?

  3. If I update some IronRuby code to pass the specs, how do I know that
    the specs are even correct?

Thanks, Orion

Thanks for that.

After the code review comments about Exception#== I was running the
Exception specs. 3 fail against ruby 1.9.2p290 (2011-07-09)
[i386-mingw32]

I don’t have access to a linux/mac system at work to check if they pass
on
non-windows platforms, but it doesn’t look like there’s anything
platform
related in those errors, so I’d doubt it.

Random comment:
It appears that there’s a lot more work to be done in IronRuby
particularly relating to Errno and SystemCallErrors - I could do this
work, but there’s a blocking problem:

  • Various bits of IronRuby core code call helper methods such as
    RubyExceptions.CreateEINVAL, RubyExceptions.CreateEEXIST, etc, etc.
    These
    are supposed to return Errno::EINVAL, but they can’t, because the Errno
    classes are defined in IronRuby.Libraries and the
    RubyExceptions.CreateXYZ
    methods are defined in IronRuby.dll. We’d have to move the Errno stuff
    out
    of Libraries and into IronRuby.dll I think

From: Tomas M. [email protected]
To: “[email protected][email protected]
Date: 01/11/2011 10:16 a.m.
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs
Sent by: [email protected]

  1. Partly. We are in progress of updating them. Since we?ve added more
    specs and sometimes corrected existing ones this needs to be done with
    care. The current progress is captured here:

https://gist.github.com/1159998

After we are done with this process of bringing the specs up to date we
can submit a path to RubySpec containing the changed we made. The plan
is
also to make the RubySpec dir a submodule so that merging with RubySpec
is
easier.

  1. Or maybe we should just remove MRI completely? You can always use one
    on your system. I need to check if we need CRuby for anything in the
    infrastructure.

  2. Well, that would be a question for RubySpec maintainers. I found some
    specs be failures Windows specific, which means the specs are not
    properly
    written. Feel free to contribute to RubySpecs git repo ? I bet they are
    happy to accept fixes.

  3. Well, you need to figure out if the behavior makes sense. If it
    doesn?t
    feel free to file a bug on CRuby and let them decide if the behavior is
    intentional or not. Then CRuby might get fixed, specs might get fixed,
    or
    IronRuby might get fixed.

Which specs particularly are you working on? Is it marshal related?

Tomas

From: [email protected] [
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs

I’ve just run mspec under the Languages\Ruby\Tests\mspec\rubyspec\core
folder against MRI 1.9.2p0 (which is checked into the ironlanguages-main
git repo), and it crashes with a segfault in putc_spec.rb

I then tried running against MRI 1.9.2p290 and I get the following:

   1518 files, 9618 examples, 28229 expectations, 339 failures, 256

errors

Running against the dev build of IronRuby stalls running tests in the
array subfolder, so I can’t even complete the run.

I’d like to try fixing some of the spec failures that IronRuby has, but
these results raise several questions:

  1. Are the specs in the mspec\rubyspec folder up to date? How would
    someone find this out and/or update them?
  • Also, I added a few specs the other day for the marshalling code. Do
    these need to somehow get pushed upstream into some “master” rubyspec
    repository??
  1. Shouldn’t we check the latest build of MRI into the ironlangauges
    git-repo? Either the latest 1.9.2 or the just-released 1.9.3 instead?

  2. Isn’t MRI the “definitive” ruby? How can the specs be failing against
    MRI?

  3. If I update some IronRuby code to pass the specs, how do I know that
    the specs are even correct?

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

There is a lot of work to do around exceptions in general. I wouldn’t
start digging into it if I were you :). I’m thinking of some core
changes in how we map Ruby to .NET exceptions… it will take me some
time to get to it though. I would not worry about all these Errno
exceptions for now unless your application is blocked by some specific
bug. Certainly not if a few specs fail here and there (we have thousands
of specs failing, which might be more important to fix).

Time to file a bug on CRuby to get some input from MRI guys what they
think the behavior should really be if it doesn’t make sense. Or
RubySpec guys if the MRI behavior is reasonable.

Tomas

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 4:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs

Thanks for that.

After the code review comments about Exception#== I was running the
Exception specs. 3 fail against ruby 1.9.2p290 (2011-07-09)
[i386-mingw32]

I don’t have access to a linux/mac system at work to check if they pass
on non-windows platforms, but it doesn’t look like there’s anything
platform related in those errors, so I’d doubt it.

Random comment:
It appears that there’s a lot more work to be done in IronRuby
particularly relating to Errno and SystemCallErrors - I could do this
work, but there’s a blocking problem:

  • Various bits of IronRuby core code call helper methods such as
    RubyExceptions.CreateEINVAL, RubyExceptions.CreateEEXIST, etc, etc.
    These are supposed to return Errno::EINVAL, but they can’t, because the
    Errno classes are defined in IronRuby.Libraries and the
    RubyExceptions.CreateXYZ methods are defined in IronRuby.dll. We’d have
    to move the Errno stuff out of Libraries and into IronRuby.dll I think

From: Tomas M.
<[email protected]mailto:[email protected]>
To:
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]
<[email protected]mailto:[email protected]>
Date: 01/11/2011 10:16 a.m.
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs
Sent by:
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]


  1. Partly. We are in progress of updating them. Since we’ve added more
    specs and sometimes corrected existing ones this needs to be done with
    care. The current progress is captured here:

https://gist.github.com/1159998

After we are done with this process of bringing the specs up to date we
can submit a path to RubySpec containing the changed we made. The plan
is also to make the RubySpec dir a submodule so that merging with
RubySpec is easier.

  1. Or maybe we should just remove MRI completely? You can always use one
    on your system. I need to check if we need CRuby for anything in the
    infrastructure.

  2. Well, that would be a question for RubySpec maintainers. I found some
    specs be failures Windows specific, which means the specs are not
    properly written. Feel free to contribute to RubySpecs git repo - I bet
    they are happy to accept fixes.

  3. Well, you need to figure out if the behavior makes sense. If it
    doesn’t feel free to file a bug on CRuby and let them decide if the
    behavior is intentional or not. Then CRuby might get fixed, specs might
    get fixed, or IronRuby might get fixed.

Which specs particularly are you working on? Is it marshal related?

Tomas

From:
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:19 PM
To: [email protected]mailto:[email protected]
Subject: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs

I’ve just run mspec under the Languages\Ruby\Tests\mspec\rubyspec\core
folder against MRI 1.9.2p0 (which is checked into the ironlanguages-main
git repo), and it crashes with a segfault in putc_spec.rb

I then tried running against MRI 1.9.2p290 and I get the following:

  1518 files, 9618 examples, 28229 expectations, 339 failures, 256 

errors

Running against the dev build of IronRuby stalls running tests in the
array subfolder, so I can’t even complete the run.

I’d like to try fixing some of the spec failures that IronRuby has, but
these results raise several questions:

  1. Are the specs in the mspec\rubyspec folder up to date? How would
    someone find this out and/or update them?
  • Also, I added a few specs the other day for the marshalling code. Do
    these need to somehow get pushed upstream into some “master” rubyspec
    repository??
  1. Shouldn’t we check the latest build of MRI into the ironlangauges
    git-repo? Either the latest 1.9.2 or the just-released 1.9.3 instead?

  2. Isn’t MRI the “definitive” ruby? How can the specs be failing against
    MRI?

  3. If I update some IronRuby code to pass the specs, how do I know that
    the specs are even correct?

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

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