[#85349] [Ruby trunk Bug#14334] Segmentation fault after running rspec (ruby/2.5.0/erb.rb:885 / simplecov/source_file.rb:85) — pragtob@...
Issue #14334 has been updated by PragTob (Tobias Pfeiffer).
3 messages
2018/02/02
[#85358] Re: [ruby-cvs:69220] nobu:r62039 (trunk): compile.c: unnecessary freezing — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
[email protected] wrote:
5 messages
2018/02/03
[#85612] Why require autoconf 2.67+ — leam hall <leamhall@...>
Please pardon the intrusion; I am new to Ruby and like to pull the
6 messages
2018/02/17
[#85616] Re: Why require autoconf 2.67+
— Vít Ondruch <v.ondruch@...>
2018/02/18
VGhpcyBjb3VsZCBoZWxwIHlvdSB0byBidWlsZCBSdWJ5IHdpdGggb2xkZXIgYXV0b2NvbmYgKDIu
[#85634] [Ruby trunk Bug#14494] [PATCH] tool/m4/ruby_replace_type.m4 use AC_CHECK_TYPES for HAVE_* macros — normalperson@...
Issue #14494 has been reported by normalperson (Eric Wong).
3 messages
2018/02/19
[#85674] [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid — matz@...
Issue #13618 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto).
5 messages
2018/02/20
[#85686] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2018/02/20
[email protected] wrote:
[#85704] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
— Koichi Sasada <ko1@...>
2018/02/21
On 2018/02/20 18:06, Eric Wong wrote:
[ruby-core:85336] Re: [Ruby trunk Feature#13618] [PATCH] auto fiber schedule for rb_wait_for_single_fd and rb_waitpid
From:
Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Date:
2018-02-02 06:22:08 UTC
List:
ruby-core #85336
[email protected] wrote: > Having discussed this with Koichi I think he is wanting to > merge this into core but the big blocker here is naming and > some small details. I'm leaning towards Thread::Green, so existing users can do s/Thread.new/Thread::Green.new/ in many cases. But, it would be easier if somebody good at API design (matz) chimed in :> Meanwhile, I think get rid of floating point timeouts: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14431 Then it might be easier to work on Queue/Mutex/... support. > > One question, is how will Thread#[]/#[]= be handled inside the lambda? > > I think it should be simply treated as a Thread global so it is shared between the lambdas. > > If you need lambda specific storage we could implement something else. Otherwise it complicates stuff. That's probably too incompatible; I think the current Fiber#[]/#[]= behavior is fine (Thread::Green implemented as subclass of Fiber) > One big question I have though is how rb_thread_call_with_gvl > and rb_thread_call_without_gvl will be handled, cause without > magic handling there we don't get free PG / MiniRacer support > and many others which is a huge shame. I expect PG to be able to benefit from rb_wait_for_single_fd when using sockets. I know mysql2 uses rb_wait_for_single_fd, at least. rb_thread_call_* is meant for CPU (or FS/memory)-bound tasks, and wouldn't MiniRacer be CPU-bound? Dunno much about it... Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>
