--001517402e0a3f062004b0d7738c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Aaron Patterson <tenderlove / ruby-lang.org>wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:19:19AM +0900, Joshua Ballanco wrote: > > > > Issue #5542 has been updated by Joshua Ballanco. > > > > > > This was introduced in r29638: > > > > > > * object.c: Make BasicObject.new accept no parameter. > > Revert of r26135 [ruby-core:27080], as per [ruby-core:32952]. > > > > Was this change in BasicObject.new intentional? If so, is it intentional > that this behavior should be different than 1.9.2? If not can we have this > back-ported? > > Yes, this was definitely an intentional change. Please see the threads > mentioned in the commit message ([ruby-core:27080] and > [ruby-core:32952]). > I can access the former thread, but the later [ruby-core:32952] seems to have gone missing? http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/32952 > I cannot speak for backporting this to 1.9.2. I suppose backporting is not a huge issue (I actually caught this due to some less-than-optimally implemented code in our code base), however I worry about having this kind of a semantic change between minor versions. - Josh --001517402e0a3f062004b0d7738c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Aaron Pattersonspan dir="ltr"><tenderlove / ruby-lang.org></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote"tyle="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div class="im">On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:19:19AM +0900, Joshua Ballancorote:<br> ><br> > Issue #5542 has been updated by Joshua Ballanco.<br> ><br> ><br> > This was introduced in r29638:<br> ><br> ><br> > * object.c: Make BasicObject.new accept no parameter.<br> > Revert of r26135 [ruby-core:27080], as per [ruby-core:32952].<br> ><br> > Was this change in BasicObject.new intentional? If so, is it intentional that this behavior should be different than 1.9.2? If not can we have this back-ported?<br> <br> </div>Yes, this was definitely an intentional change. Please see the threads<br> mentioned in the commit message ([ruby-core:27080] and<br> [ruby-core:32952]).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I can access the former thread, but the later [ruby-core:32952] seems to have gone missing?</div><div><br></div><div>http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/32952</div> <div><br></div><div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I cannot speak for backporting this to 1.9.2.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I suppose backporting is not a huge issue (I actually caught this due to some less-than-optimally implemented code in our code base), however I worry about having this kind of a semantic change between minor versions.</div> <div><br></div><div>- Josh</div></div> --001517402e0a3f062004b0d7738c--