Ironruby core - Apr 2008 - "Native" Zlib Implementation Patch

A patch implementing Zlib decompression (with GZip decompression
support) as a built in library has been submitted to RubyForge:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=19711&group_id=4359&atid=16800
.  It''s quite a bit faster then trying to use Zliby (this is
essentially a port of that).  It works, though binary files seem to be
causing some problem, I suspect it''s because of the differences in
Unicode Strings in the CLR vs non-Unicode strings in ruby 1.8.6.
Anyway, it''s a start.

-- 
Michael Letterle
[Polymath Prokrammer]
http://blog.prokrams.com

Michael Letterle:
> "Native" Zlib Implementation Patch
Thanks for sending this in!

FYI - a few quick pointers about your contribution. No need to take any action
since I''ve fixed most of them on my machine already.

1. Bangs

Please do your best to incorporate the bangs in your contributions. The bangs
indicate a non-nullable reference type. I find that it''s best if you
create a VS macro to insert them - I bind this macro to the CTRL-! key:

Sub InsertBang()
    DTE.ActiveDocument.Selection.Text = "/*!*/"
End Sub

This helps to reinforce in your mind (and in the mind of the code reviewer)
whether a given reference type is non-nullable or not. This will also greatly
help us out when we start running spec# for real across our codebase to look for
violations of this contract.

Generally you''ll find that any time you get a CodeContext from us
it''s guaranteed to not be null, which means that you don''t
have to do a null check. The converse is also true - if you have a nullable
reference type, you''ll need to validate it with one of the helpers in
our Microsoft.Scripting.ContractUtils class.

2. General formatting issues

Please do try and stick with .NET naming conventions if possible when porting
code from Java etc. I realize that it does take time to do this, and thanks, but
it''s either you do it or I have to :) Not a big deal since I can just
do a CTRL-K CTRL-F on your code, but it would rock if you could format along the
same lines as the rest of the code.

3. Testing / coverage

If possible please let us know how many specs from the spec suite your code
passes etc. That would help us determine how much to look into the codebase
itself.

Thanks,
-John

The rubinius specs for Zlib are... wanting.  Though there are some.
Are the rubinius specs used as is?

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:08 PM, John Lam (IRONRUBY)
<jflam at microsoft.com> wrote:
> Michael Letterle:
>
>  > "Native" Zlib Implementation Patch
>
>  Thanks for sending this in!
>
>  FYI - a few quick pointers about your contribution. No need to take any
action since I''ve fixed most of them on my machine already.
>
>  1. Bangs
>
>  Please do your best to incorporate the bangs in your contributions. The
bangs indicate a non-nullable reference type. I find that it''s best if
you create a VS macro to insert them - I bind this macro to the CTRL-! key:
>
>  Sub InsertBang()
>     DTE.ActiveDocument.Selection.Text = "/*!*/"
>  End Sub
>
>  This helps to reinforce in your mind (and in the mind of the code
reviewer) whether a given reference type is non-nullable or not. This will also
greatly help us out when we start running spec# for real across our codebase to
look for violations of this contract.
>
>  Generally you''ll find that any time you get a CodeContext from us
it''s guaranteed to not be null, which means that you don''t
have to do a null check. The converse is also true - if you have a nullable
reference type, you''ll need to validate it with one of the helpers in
our Microsoft.Scripting.ContractUtils class.
>
>  2. General formatting issues
>
>  Please do try and stick with .NET naming conventions if possible when
porting code from Java etc. I realize that it does take time to do this, and
thanks, but it''s either you do it or I have to :) Not a big deal since
I can just do a CTRL-K CTRL-F on your code, but it would rock if you could
format along the same lines as the rest of the code.
>
>  3. Testing / coverage
>
>  If possible please let us know how many specs from the spec suite your
code passes etc. That would help us determine how much to look into the codebase
itself.
>
>  Thanks,
>  -John
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ironruby-core mailing list
>  Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
>  http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>


-- 
Michael Letterle
[Polymath Prokrammer]
http://blog.prokrams.com

Michael Letterle:
>
> The rubinius specs for Zlib are... wanting.  Though there are some.
> Are the rubinius specs used as is?
>
Just peeked at the latest rubinius specs and there is some coverage.
I''m going to start working on running the latest rubinius spec runner
in my next checkin.

-John