-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 607
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
Add 2.2 language specs #3364
Add 2.2 language specs #3364
Conversation
This reverts commit 25a735a. See my notes at rubinius#3352.
In Ruby 2.2+, we have #receiver, so it makes sense to use consistent names here and and get rid of #self and #self= in favor of #receiver and #receiver=
These were lost by accident while resolving merge conflicts between the master branch and the 2.2 branch.
In order not to break the whole hash_spec.rb, the new syntax is eval'd.
Looks fine to me.
We'll probably need to re-generate the parser first, then we should be able to remove the use of |
Hey @yorickpeterse, thanks for the feedback. I'll probably write a few more language specs in the next couple of days. I'll update the PR when I do. |
Hi everyone,
At this point I still see 3 failed specs with MRI 2.2.1 in |
@ruipserra Any feedback on the Redmine ticket you submitted? Sometimes it can be a bit hard to get a hold of Matz & co, in that case replying to the ticket (and specifically mentioning somebody like Koichi or Nobu) sometimes can do the trick. Unless this particular Redmine ticket is blocking I'll take a look at this PR this weekend. |
Fail, I didn't see this PR until now. |
I think this needs a rebase as there are a bunch of commits that aren't yet on our 2.2 branch. |
The easiest way to do this is probably cherry-pick the commits from here to the 2.2 branch so we can close this and avoid the confusion. If @ruipserra, @yorickpeterse, or @tak1n can't do this, I'll do it in a day or two. |
Commits rebased into the 2.2 branch, thanks! |
Awesome thanks :) |
This PR adds specs for the the following language changes in ruby 2.2 (see NEWS file):
accessible in its default value expression. [Bug #9593]
I'll go over some points about the commits:
nil_spec.rb
,true_spec.rb
andfalse_spec.rb
inspec/ruby/language
with a single example forfrozen?
, but for the sake of consistency with the existing specs I ended up putting them inkernel/frozen_spec.rb
. Was this the best choice?eval
because otherwise it would break the whole file (the parser would throw a syntax error and no examples would be run).Thank you for your time.