ruby-core@ruby-lang.org archive (unofficial mirror)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [ruby-core:67781] Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2
@ 2015-01-24  3:45 Anthony Crumley
  2015-01-24  5:25 ` [ruby-core:67786] " U.Nakamura
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Crumley @ 2015-01-24  3:45 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 886 bytes --]

This RubySpec specification passes in Ruby versions 2.0 and 2.1 but fails
in 2.2 and 2.3.  Is this change a regression or was it intentional?

anthonycrumley$ ../mspec/bin/mspec -e 'An instance method with a default
argument calls a method with the same name as the local'
language/def_spec.rb
ruby 2.2.0p0 (2014-12-25 revision 49005) [x86_64-darwin14]
F

1)
An instance method with a default argument calls a method with the same
name as the local FAILED
Expected nil
 to equal 1

/Users/anthonycrumley/Projects/ruby/spec/rubyspec/language/def_spec.rb:175:in
`block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'
/Users/anthonycrumley/Projects/ruby/spec/rubyspec/language/def_spec.rb:113:in
`<top (required)>'

Finished in 0.005185 seconds

1 file, 1 example, 1 expectation, 1 failure, 0 errors

https://github.com/anthonycrumley/rubyspec/blob/master/language/def_spec.rb#L168-L178

Thanks.

Anthony

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1284 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [ruby-core:67786] Re: Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2
  2015-01-24  3:45 [ruby-core:67781] Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2 Anthony Crumley
@ 2015-01-24  5:25 ` U.Nakamura
  2015-01-28  4:16   ` [ruby-core:67848] " Anthony Crumley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: U.Nakamura @ 2015-01-24  5:25 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: Ruby developers

Hi,

In message "[ruby-core:67781] Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2"
    on Jan.24,2015 12:45:34, <anthony.crumley@gmail.com> wrote:
> This RubySpec specification passes in Ruby versions 2.0 and 2.1 but fails
> in 2.2 and 2.3.  Is this change a regression or was it intentional?

See https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10314 about this.

IMO, it cannot be said to intentional.
But it seems to be determined as a specification change.


Regards,
-- 
U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* [ruby-core:67848] Re: Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2
  2015-01-24  5:25 ` [ruby-core:67786] " U.Nakamura
@ 2015-01-28  4:16   ` Anthony Crumley
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Crumley @ 2015-01-28  4:16 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: Ruby developers

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 733 bytes --]

Changed the RubySpec related to this issue.
https://github.com/anthonycrumley/rubyspec/commit/69beb84864ade8445bd71e171ff3d6472d62c49a

On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 11:26:06 PM U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In message "[ruby-core:67781] Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2"
>     on Jan.24,2015 12:45:34, <anthony.crumley@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This RubySpec specification passes in Ruby versions 2.0 and 2.1 but fails
> > in 2.2 and 2.3.  Is this change a regression or was it intentional?
>
> See https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10314 about this.
>
> IMO, it cannot be said to intentional.
> But it seems to be determined as a specification change.
>
>
> Regards,
> --
> U.Nakamura <usa@garbagecollect.jp>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1330 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-28  4:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-24  3:45 [ruby-core:67781] Method scope change between 2.1 and 2.2 Anthony Crumley
2015-01-24  5:25 ` [ruby-core:67786] " U.Nakamura
2015-01-28  4:16   ` [ruby-core:67848] " Anthony Crumley

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).