Orion.Edwards at gallagher.co
Mon Oct 31 19:40:18 EDT 2011
Thanks for that.
After the code review comments about Exception#== I was running the
Exception specs. 3 fail against ruby 1.9.2p290 (2011-07-09) [i386-mingw32]
I don't have access to a linux/mac system at work to check if they pass on
non-windows platforms, but it doesn't look like there's anything platform
related in those errors, so I'd doubt it.
It appears that there's a lot more work to be done in IronRuby
particularly relating to Errno and SystemCallErrors - I could do this
work, but there's a blocking problem:
- Various bits of IronRuby core code call helper methods such as
RubyExceptions.CreateEINVAL, RubyExceptions.CreateEEXIST, etc, etc. These
are supposed to return Errno::EINVAL, but they can't, because the Errno
classes are defined in IronRuby.Libraries and the RubyExceptions.CreateXYZ
methods are defined in IronRuby.dll. We'd have to move the Errno stuff out
of Libraries and into IronRuby.dll I think
From: Tomas Matousek <Tomas.Matousek at microsoft.com>
To: "ironruby-core at rubyforge.org" <ironruby-core at rubyforge.org>
Date: 01/11/2011 10:16 a.m.
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs
Sent by: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org
1) Partly. We are in progress of updating them. Since we?ve added more
specs and sometimes corrected existing ones this needs to be done with
care. The current progress is captured here:
After we are done with this process of bringing the specs up to date we
can submit a path to RubySpec containing the changed we made. The plan is
also to make the RubySpec dir a submodule so that merging with RubySpec is
2) Or maybe we should just remove MRI completely? You can always use one
on your system. I need to check if we need CRuby for anything in the
3) Well, that would be a question for RubySpec maintainers. I found some
specs be failures Windows specific, which means the specs are not properly
written. Feel free to contribute to RubySpecs git repo ? I bet they are
happy to accept fixes.
4) Well, you need to figure out if the behavior makes sense. If it doesn?t
feel free to file a bug on CRuby and let them decide if the behavior is
intentional or not. Then CRuby might get fixed, specs might get fixed, or
IronRuby might get fixed.
Which specs particularly are you working on? Is it marshal related?
From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [
mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:19 PM
To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
Subject: [Ironruby-core] RubySpecs
I've just run mspec under the Languages\Ruby\Tests\mspec\rubyspec\core
folder against MRI 1.9.2p0 (which is checked into the ironlanguages-main
git repo), and it crashes with a segfault in putc_spec.rb
I then tried running against MRI 1.9.2p290 and I get the following:
1518 files, 9618 examples, 28229 expectations, 339 failures, 256
Running against the dev build of IronRuby stalls running tests in the
array subfolder, so I can't even complete the run.
I'd like to try fixing some of the spec failures that IronRuby has, but
these results raise several questions:
1. Are the specs in the mspec\rubyspec folder up to date? How would
someone find this out and/or update them?
- Also, I added a few specs the other day for the marshalling code. Do
these need to somehow get pushed upstream into some "master" rubyspec
2. Shouldn't we check the latest build of MRI into the ironlangauges
git-repo? Either the latest 1.9.2 or the just-released 1.9.3 instead?
3. Isn't MRI the "definitive" ruby? How can the specs be failing against
4. If I update some IronRuby code to pass the specs, how do I know that
the specs are even correct?
Ironruby-core mailing list
Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ironruby-core