New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updates for frozen string literal compatibility. #1182

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 13, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@pat
Contributor

pat commented Jun 21, 2017

To be clear, @twalpole did all the hard work previously in #1023, so I've doubled up on their efforts (taking a bit of a different approach, mostly to use dup given that seems to be the preference). I've not gone and added all the pragma comments to the files though.

Given that all the testing dependencies seem to be frozen-string-literal friendly, you could take the approach of enabling the flag for MRI 2.4 onwards in the Travis configuration to avoid regressions:

before_script:
- if (ruby -e "exit RUBY_VERSION.to_f >= 2.4"); then export RUBYOPT="--enable-frozen-string-literal"; fi; echo $RUBYOPT

Or adding the pragma comments will do the trick as well.

@schneems

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@schneems

schneems Aug 24, 2017

Contributor

Is there a game plan for adding the pragma to rack? #1203

Contributor

schneems commented Aug 24, 2017

Is there a game plan for adding the pragma to rack? #1203

@pat

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pat

pat Aug 25, 2017

Contributor

@schneems I've generally left that up to the maintainers preference, but I'm happy to put the work in and get it in all the files (in this PR or a separate one).

Contributor

pat commented Aug 25, 2017

@schneems I've generally left that up to the maintainers preference, but I'm happy to put the work in and get it in all the files (in this PR or a separate one).

@twalpole

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@twalpole

twalpole Aug 25, 2017

@pat Without commitment that it will actually get merged, I'd suggest you wait on putting in the work - been there done that (as you pointed out originally)

twalpole commented Aug 25, 2017

@pat Without commitment that it will actually get merged, I'd suggest you wait on putting in the work - been there done that (as you pointed out originally)

@tenderlove tenderlove merged commit 4786af0 into rack:master Apr 13, 2018

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment