Specification.all isn't all #335

Closed
zenspider opened this Issue May 18, 2012 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@zenspider
Contributor

zenspider commented May 18, 2012

As discovered in jbarnette/isolate#47, 7d43f14 makes Specification._all respond with a list of specifications minus redundant specs instead of all specs. If it is called all, I think it should be all. If we want unique specs, then we should add api for that.

@ghost ghost assigned evanphx May 18, 2012

@zenspider zenspider referenced this issue in jbarnette/isolate May 18, 2012

Closed

failed test (rake version) on fresh checkout #47

@drbrain

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@drbrain

drbrain Nov 27, 2012

Member

Gem::Specification.all issues a deprecation warning, so is this still relevant?

Member

drbrain commented Nov 27, 2012

Gem::Specification.all issues a deprecation warning, so is this still relevant?

@drbrain

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@drbrain

drbrain Nov 27, 2012

Member

Additionally, this and #334 appear to be duplicates

Member

drbrain commented Nov 27, 2012

Additionally, this and #334 appear to be duplicates

@duckinator

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@duckinator

duckinator Jan 1, 2016

Member

@zenspider, is this still a valid issue when using current versions of rubygems?

As a note:

Gem::Specification.all issues a deprecation warning, and the current documentation for .all recommends using Enumerable methods.

From that, my understanding is that the current equivalent of this which uses actually-documented methods would be Gem::Specification.each.to_a or similar. However: .each ultimately winds up calling ._all, which appears to be a direct descendant of the old .all, but I don't know enough about this codebase to tell if it is functionally equivalent to the old .all.

Member

duckinator commented Jan 1, 2016

@zenspider, is this still a valid issue when using current versions of rubygems?

As a note:

Gem::Specification.all issues a deprecation warning, and the current documentation for .all recommends using Enumerable methods.

From that, my understanding is that the current equivalent of this which uses actually-documented methods would be Gem::Specification.each.to_a or similar. However: .each ultimately winds up calling ._all, which appears to be a direct descendant of the old .all, but I don't know enough about this codebase to tell if it is functionally equivalent to the old .all.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment