On Jul 11, 4:21 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> IMO, it seems like more work than its worth to support the few people
> that don't have rake installed. If a user has to make sure that gcc,
> libxml, libiconv, zlib, ruby, etc are installed, why not rake?
That's not the main i
Hello Sean and Charlie,
>> Well, File.open is a ruby method while Document.open is a libxml method.
>> Perhaps Ruby has some smarts built into it with File.open and the garbage
>> collector.
>
> Ruby does the same thing libxml now does, it calls the GC whenever errno is
> set to EMFILE or ENFILE.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 130 tests, 716 assertions, 1 failures, 0 errors
>>> rake aborted!
>>> Command failed with status (1): [/opt/local/bin/ruby -Ilib:test:ext
>>> "/opt/l...]
>>>
>>> (See full trace by running task with --trace)
>>> Exit 1
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Trans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 11, 3:21 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Separate scripts are more intuitive than rake tasks?
>
> I understand what you thinking, but there are some considerations
> involved. The reason we should u
On Jul 11, 3:21 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Separate scripts are more intuitive than rake tasks?
I understand what you thinking, but there are some considerations
involved. The reason we should use scripts rather than the Rakefile
(whether it be via the traditional setup.r
Separate scripts are more intuitive than rake tasks?
I agree with Aaron in terms of usability... though I think setup.rb
should be implemented in terms of rake tasks since setup.rb < rake
functionality. Granted that's not what exists in code -sc
--
Sean Chittenden
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Trans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 11, 1:45 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> I've added a patch to the tracker that adds a test task and a build
>> task to the rake file.
>>
>> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&ai
On Jul 11, 1:45 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I've added a patch to the tracker that adds a test task and a build
> task to the rake file.
>
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=21172&group_id...
>
> If you apply that patch, you can just execute 'rake bu
On Jul 11, 12:45 pm, "Aaron Patterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Not sure, I run ruby test/test_suite.rb.
>
> >> Looks like the test suite must be run from within the test directory.
> >> Otherwise test assets wi
130 tests, 716 assertions, 1 failures, 0 errors
rake aborted!
Command failed with status (1): [/opt/local/bin/ruby -Ilib:test:ext
"/opt/l...]
(See full trace by running task with --trace)
Exit 1
Yes, I think that is because of the implementation of
register_error_handler. I had fixed this in o
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Wild. Alright. It works for me out of the box. Is this trunk or before
>>> the libxml.rb patch? -sc
>>
>> setup.rb has never successfully run the tests for me, even before the
>> libxml.rb patch. I'm on OS X.
>
>
Wild. Alright. It works for me out of the box. Is this trunk or
before
the libxml.rb patch? -sc
setup.rb has never successfully run the tests for me, even before the
libxml.rb patch. I'm on OS X.
Strange. I'm OS-X and here's my output with trunk. -sc
% rake test
(in /Users/sean/src
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Can you try with just `./setup.rb test` ? I'm cautious about updating
>>> lib/libxml.rb simply because it's included by everything and I'm still
>>> not
>>> up to speed post-gem'ification re: path/packaging.
>>
>> [EM
Can you try with just `./setup.rb test` ? I'm cautious about
updating
lib/libxml.rb simply because it's included by everything and I'm
still not
up to speed post-gem'ification re: path/packaging.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] libxml]$ ./setup.rb test
/Users/aaron/svn/libxml/test/tc_well_formed.rb:1:in
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Ha! I just committed something nearly identical to this because I
>>> couldn't
>>> run the tests using ./setup.rb test. I didn't use the constant, however
>>> and
>>> did the File.join(...) for each open call. Anyway
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> Can you try with just `./setup.rb test` ? I'm cautious about updating
> lib/libxml.rb simply because it's included by everything and I'm still not
> up to speed post-gem'ification re: path/packaging.
[EMAIL PRO
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I'm not entirely opposed to the idea... but am curious for some example
>>> functions. :) -sc
>>
>> XML::Parser.register_error_handler could be implemented in ruby.
>> ruby_xml_attr_not_type_name() could be implemente
Ha! I just committed something nearly identical to this because I
couldn't
run the tests using ./setup.rb test. I didn't use the constant,
however and
did the File.join(...) for each open call. Anyway, let me know if
trunk
works for the tests for you now. -sc
The tests still do not wor
I'm not entirely opposed to the idea... but am curious for some
example
functions. :) -sc
XML::Parser.register_error_handler could be implemented in ruby.
ruby_xml_attr_not_type_name() could be implemented in ruby.
All of the rb_define_consts in ruby_xml_node.c
ruby_xml_node_set_xpath_get(
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Not sure, I run ruby test/test_suite.rb.
>>
>> Looks like the test suite must be run from within the test directory.
>> Otherwise test assets will not be found. I've added a patch to the
>> tracker that figures out whe
Ah, good idea. It just retries once after doing a GC?
Yup.
Have time to turn this into a test case?
Done. I also cleaned up the tests so that they almost all pass now.
If you're opening files in tests, use something akin to:
File.open(File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), 'model/foo.xml')
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As I've started reading through the libxml-ruby code, I have run
>> across methods implemented in C that could be implemented in Ruby. I
>> would like to change them to be implemented in Ruby. Is anyone
>> opposed to t
Not sure, I run ruby test/test_suite.rb.
Looks like the test suite must be run from within the test directory.
Otherwise test assets will not be found. I've added a patch to the
tracker that figures out where the assets directory is so that you can
run the tests from a different directory (e.g.
So I don't see this as a bug in the libxml bindings.
Maybe you are right, but if I change XML::Document.file("test.xml")
to File.open("test.xml"), I won't run out of file handles.
I wonder what makes the difference...
Well, File.open is a ruby method while Document.open is a libxml
method. P
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As I've started reading through the libxml-ruby code, I have run
>> across methods implemented in C that could be implemented in Ruby. I
>> would like to change them to be implemented in Ruby. Is anyone
>> opposed to t
As I've started reading through the libxml-ruby code, I have run
across methods implemented in C that could be implemented in Ruby. I
would like to change them to be implemented in Ruby. Is anyone
opposed to that? I think it would make coding easier, less buggy, and
more fun!
I'm not entirel
Bugs item #21169, was opened at 2008-07-11 14:33
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1971&aid=21169&group_id=494
Category: General
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Tiago Macedo (tmacedo)
Assigned to: Nobody (None)
Summary:
Bugs item #21169, was opened at 2008-07-11 14:33
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1971&aid=21169&group_id=494
Category: General
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Tiago Macedo (tmacedo)
Assigned to: Nobody (None)
Summary:
Bugs item #19648, was opened at 2008-04-19 10:42
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1971&aid=19648&group_id=494
Category: None
Group: None
>Status: Closed
>Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Benjamin Reed (rangerrick)
>Assigned to: Sean Chitten
Hi Charlie,
I guess what I'm wondering is how can the data from ruby be fed
into libxml-ruby SaxParser - when I only see 2 methods for passing
data, parser.string= and parser.filename= . I must be missing
understanding.
Thanks,
Todd
2008/7/10 Charlie Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Todd,
>
>
30 matches
Mail list logo
