[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Priorities for JRuby 1.3

Charles Oliver Nutter

2/28/2009 9:17:00 PM

With JRuby 1.2 almost out the door, we should talk a bit about where to
go with JRuby 1.3. There's always more work to do, but in this case
there's a few directions we could probably go.

Some obvious items will continue to see work:

* 1.9 libraries, interp, compiler, parser
* 1.8.6 bugs

But there's others that we may need to prioritize:

* 1.8.7 support
* Ruby execution performance (how fast do you want it?)
* Specific library performance (YAML, IO, Java)
* More Java integration refactoring (esp. subclassing)
* "Compiler #2" to produce normal Java classes from Ruby
* Improvements to AOT compilation (all-at-once, eliminate runtime codegen)

And there's a number of internal chores to work on too:

* Start generating most of the call path, to reduce duplicate code
* Specific-arity optimizations for block yield (could be big)
* Compiler cleanup and refactoring
* Modularization of core classes that aren't valid on applet, Android,
secured envs, etc; also may allow shipping smaller runtimes
* More startup perf work; I have a few ideas

As always, there's way more tasks than the few of us committing to JRuby
can work on, so I think we need to hear from users what's important. Any
of these? Other items?

- Charlie
25 Answers

Tom N

3/20/2008 6:25:00 PM

0

On Mar 20, 10:25 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
<LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 Mrz., 18:16, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 20, 10:09 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> Anonymous - What Next?
>
> I would say: Simply continue!

Why choose Scientology? There are MUCH more evil
organizations on the planet.

Look at the U.S. Military: They have invaded a sovereign
nation and killed hundreds of thousands of people (most
of them non-combatants) and forced over 4 million citizens
of that country into exile, just for starters.

How about the fundamentalist Christian churches with their
child abuse and brainwashing?

How about the Catholic church with its sheltering of pedophile
priests and its over-flowing coffers obtained mostly from Third
World peasants?

How about the Corporations who are laying waste to the
global environment?

How about the Chinese with their hundreds of millions of
de facto slaves toiling in factories and plantations and
mines?

I don't think you want to tackle any real issues. I think you
just picked Scientology because they looked to be an
easy victim.

<snip>

Tom Newton

The impossible to handle .Lily FireRed.

3/20/2008 9:43:00 PM

0

On Mar 20, 7:24 pm, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 20, 10:25 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 20 Mrz., 18:16, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 20, 10:09 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> > Anonymous - What Next?
>
> > I would say: Simply continue!
>
> Why choose Scientology?

Did you ask me? Because I can only answer for myself. And there are
several reasons, one of them is, that I had the feeling, nobody else
is doing it, if I don't do it. I mean protesting against what is going
on, or better said, trying to make people aware about the dangers of
scientology. I consider this a real threat to society in certain ways,
and I want to make this public. I started posting here only because I
wanted some advise from people, who had faced similar crazy things.

>There are MUCH more evil
> organizations on the planet.

Maybe. And I expect society to fight against it, therefore society can
expect from me to fight (unviolently and peacefully), what came to my
attention as something which I do not want to continue the way it is
now and which I think is evil enough to be changed. What I expect from
others, I will try to give myself in my little area, as good as I can.

..Lily.

>
> Look at the U.S. Military: They have invaded a sovereign
> nation and killed hundreds of thousands of people (most
> of them non-combatants) and forced over 4 million citizens
> of that country into exile, just for starters.
>
> How about the fundamentalist Christian churches with their
> child abuse and brainwashing?
>
> How about the Catholic church with its sheltering of pedophile
> priests and its over-flowing coffers obtained mostly from Third
> World peasants?
>
> How about the Corporations who are laying waste to the
> global environment?
>
> How about the Chinese with their hundreds of millions of
> de facto slaves toiling in factories and plantations and
> mines?
>
> I don't think you want to tackle any real issues. I think you
> just picked Scientology because they looked to be an
> easy victim.
>
> <snip>
>
> Tom Newton

The impossible to handle .Lily FireRed.

3/20/2008 10:24:00 PM

0

On Mar 20, 10:43 pm, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
<LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 20, 7:24 pm, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 20, 10:25 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> > <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 20 Mrz., 18:16, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 20, 10:09 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> > > Anonymous - What Next?
>
> > > I would say: Simply continue!
>
> > Why choose Scientology?

Added due to clarification:
>
> Did you ask me? Because I can only answer for myself. And there are
> several reasons, one of them is, that I had the feeling, nobody else
> is doing it, if I don't do it. I mean protesting against what is going
> on, or better said, trying to make people aware about the dangers of
> scientology. I consider this a real threat to society in certain ways,
> and I want to make this public. I started posting here only because I
> wanted some advise from people, who had faced similar crazy things.

After a while posting here, I saw that ars can be a trap. I almost was
trapped as well and I know how hard it is, to see through this
masquerade here. So I felt somehow obliged to warn others, since I
myself have been warned by only one poster. There was only one, who
did kind of "save" me, or help me and without him, I don't know, what
would be now. This experience would likely everybody else let dedicate
a part of his life to this task, as a volunteers work or such.

..Lily.

>
> >There are MUCH more evil
> > organizations on the planet.
>
> Maybe. And I expect society to fight against it, therefore society can
> expect from me to fight (unviolently and peacefully), what came to my
> attention as something which I do not want to continue the way it is
> now and which I think is evil enough to be changed. What I expect from
> others, I will try to give myself in my little area, as good as I can.
>
> .Lily.
>
>
>
> > Look at the U.S. Military: They have invaded a sovereign
> > nation and killed hundreds of thousands of people (most
> > of them non-combatants) and forced over 4 million citizens
> > of that country into exile, just for starters.
>
> > How about the fundamentalist Christian churches with their
> > child abuse and brainwashing?
>
> > How about the Catholic church with its sheltering of pedophile
> > priests and its over-flowing coffers obtained mostly from Third
> > World peasants?
>
> > How about the Corporations who are laying waste to the
> > global environment?
>
> > How about the Chinese with their hundreds of millions of
> > de facto slaves toiling in factories and plantations and
> > mines?
>
> > I don't think you want to tackle any real issues. I think you
> > just picked Scientology because they looked to be an
> > easy victim.
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Tom Newton

freespeechexpress

3/20/2008 10:52:00 PM

0

On Mar 20, 3:24 pm, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
<LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> After a while posting here, I saw that ars can be a trap. I almost was
> trapped as well and I know how hard it is, to see through this
> masquerade here.

A note to others reading this thread:

There are plenty of undercover OSA operatives posting on ars. However,
neither Tom nor Lily are those OSA posters. Hence their confusion over
each other's purposes and identities.

Now, back to the story...

barb

3/21/2008 1:12:00 AM

0

freespeechexpress@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 20, 3:24 pm, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
> <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> After a while posting here, I saw that ars can be a trap. I almost was
>> trapped as well and I know how hard it is, to see through this
>> masquerade here.
>
> A note to others reading this thread:
>
> There are plenty of undercover OSA operatives posting on ars. However,
> neither Tom nor Lily are those OSA posters. Hence their confusion over
> each other's purposes and identities.
>
> Now, back to the story...

No, .lily IS one of "those OSA posters." You should know that by now.
Oh, wait...hehehehehe....

--
Barb
Chaplain, ARSCC (wdne)
I can haz Legion?

?I think that the protections that we enjoy for freedom of worship exist
so long as we don?t step over the line. When religious worship and
belief cross over into things like fraud, victimization of others and
the disruption of the political arena, that protection is no longer
appropriate.?

--Robert Goff
Professor Emeritus, UCSC

jonathon8008

3/21/2008 3:04:00 AM

0

On Mar 20, 6:11 pm, barb <xenub...@netscape.net> wrote:
> freespeechexpr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 3:24 pm, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
> > <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> After a while posting here, I saw that ars can be a trap. I almost was
> >> trapped as well and I know how hard it is, to see through this
> >> masquerade here.
>
> > A note to others reading this thread:
>
> > There are plenty of undercover OSA operatives posting on ars. However,
> > neither Tom nor Lily are those OSA posters. Hence their confusion over
> > each other's purposes and identities.
>
> > Now, back to the story...
>
> No, .lily IS one of "those OSA posters." You should know that by now.
> Oh, wait...hehehehehe....
>

The only way you could know for sure is if you are also OSA.

I'm skeptical that you are OSA, however. Just as I seriously doubt
Lily is OSA.

But don't get me wrong. I respect OSA, but maybe it is out of that
respect that I must protest calling Lily an OSA operative.

barb

3/21/2008 2:03:00 PM

0

jonathon8008@gmail.com wrote:
> On Mar 20, 6:11 pm, barb <xenub...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> freespeechexpr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Mar 20, 3:24 pm, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>>> <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> After a while posting here, I saw that ars can be a trap. I almost was
>>>> trapped as well and I know how hard it is, to see through this
>>>> masquerade here.
>>> A note to others reading this thread:
>>> There are plenty of undercover OSA operatives posting on ars. However,
>>> neither Tom nor Lily are those OSA posters. Hence their confusion over
>>> each other's purposes and identities.
>>> Now, back to the story...
>> No, .lily IS one of "those OSA posters." You should know that by now.
>> Oh, wait...hehehehehe....
>>
>
> The only way you could know for sure is if you are also OSA.
>
> I'm skeptical that you are OSA, however. Just as I seriously doubt
> Lily is OSA.
>
> But don't get me wrong. I respect OSA, but maybe it is out of that
> respect that I must protest calling Lily an OSA operative.

IT'S A TARP!

--
Barb
Chaplain, ARSCC (wdne)
I can haz Legion?

?I think that the protections that we enjoy for freedom of worship exist
so long as we don?t step over the line. When religious worship and
belief cross over into things like fraud, victimization of others and
the disruption of the political arena, that protection is no longer
appropriate.?

--Robert Goff
Professor Emeritus, UCSC

lawtears5

3/21/2008 3:01:00 PM

0

On Mar 20, 6:24 pm, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 20, 10:25 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> <LilyFire...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 20 Mrz., 18:16, Tom N <simpleman....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 20, 10:09 am, "The Impossible to handle .Lily FireRed."
>
> > Anonymous - What Next?
>
> > I would say: Simply continue!
>
> Why choose Scientology? There are MUCH more evil
> organizations on the planet.
>
> Look at the U.S. Military: They have invaded a sovereign
> nation and killed hundreds of thousands of people (most
> of them non-combatants) and forced over 4 million citizens
> of that country into exile, just for starters.

Because unless *everyone* does it it's not going to have
much effect. Such is the power of massive gov't.

> How about the fundamentalist Christian churches with their
> child abuse and brainwashing?

Er, havn't heard that from anything other than catholics and
cults. And cults are too small, usually.

> How about the Catholic church with its sheltering of pedophile
> priests

An irony here in that the Catholic church has actually done
something about their dodgy priests. Has CoS actually
done anything to prevent another Lisa McPherson?

> and its over-flowing coffers obtained mostly from Third
> World peasants?

With CoS's rep of bleeding their parishoners dry, this is
an ironic comment, isn't it?

> How about the Corporations who are laying waste to the
> global environment?
>
> How about the Chinese with their hundreds of millions of
> de facto slaves toiling in factories and plantations and
> mines?

Complicated economic/environmental situations are
beyond the scope of demonstrations and requires
political involvement by several governments. Apart
from not buying clothes from China, what should I do?

> I don't think you want to tackle any real issues. I think you
> just picked Scientology because they looked to be an
> easy victim.

Well, they are that too. While I don't think that there
is a real risk that CoS will take over the world, CoS is
a danger to people clearly, in the way cults are. And
they have been the most successful. So yes, I protest
against them.

Lawtears

>
> <snip>
>
> Tom Newton

clam.sucker

3/21/2008 10:03:00 PM

0

On Mar 21, 3:03 am, jonathon8...@gmail.com wrote:

> But don't get me wrong. I respect OSA

you freak... no wonder the cult ejected you.

James Britt

2/28/2009 10:40:00 PM

0

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

>
> But there's others that we may need to prioritize:
>
> * 1.8.7 support

Skip it.

> * Ruby execution performance (how fast do you want it?)

Silly question. :) REALLY fast.


> * Specific library performance (YAML, IO, Java)
> * More Java integration refactoring (esp. subclassing)
> * "Compiler #2" to produce normal Java classes from Ruby

That could be quite interesting.


> * Modularization of core classes that aren't valid on applet, Android,
> secured envs, etc; also may allow shipping smaller runtimes

Yes to more Android support (so to speak).


--
James Britt

www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff