RDoc VS ruby

In addition to project documentation, you've included a lot of code comments. You could adopt a standardized format and use it to generate API documentation. RDoc and YARD are two options. If I were reviewing this code at work, I would probably ask you to remove comments that explain what, not why.

That turns out to be a pretty common use case for markdown. Github, for example, renders your README.md is part of a git repo's "home" page. It's also common to have tooling that parses specially formatted comments in your source code and produce a documentation bundle, usually as a web page (ex. RDoc, YARD, JSDoc, etc.).

I have an open (draft) documentation PR for RDoc over at GitHub (https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/pull/824) that has six unanswered questions. These are embedded in the committed text itself, and each is labelled as "Reviewers: ...."

If you want to document your whole code base you should check https://github.com/ruby/rdoc

I suspect the fix is to remove_unparseable, and the repository, like the CVE, just hasn't been updated yet.

RDoc We'll use this gem to document our TwitchTag.rb class.

To create a new Rails app, you should have Ruby and Rails installed on your machine. You can find how to install Ruby on your local machine using the Ruby docs. You can install Rails by running the following command:

Ruby testing with RSpec

Not parent poster and do not have production YJIT experience. =)

My guess is that you would monitor `RubyVM::YJIT.runtime_stats[:code_region_size]` and/or `RubyVM::YJIT.runtime_stats[:code_gc_count]` so that you can get a feel for a reasonable value for your application, as well as know whether or not the "code GC" is running frequently.

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/master/doc/yjit/yjit.md#pe...

Link to the commit

Part of the major userbase pull in GitHub revolves around hosting a considerable number of popular projects including Angular, React, Kubernetes, cpython, Ruby, tensorflow, and well even the software that powers this site Forem.

Hold option and click on the “collapse file” button in the Files view of a commit or pull request, and it will collapse all the files.

Select text in a comment, issue, or pull request description and press r—the selected text (including markdown formatting) will get pre-populated as a markdown block quote reply in the next comment box.

Add .patch or .diff to any pull request URL if you want to see a plain-text diff of the pull request (e.g. maybe you want to quickly `curl ... | git apply -` an unmerged pull request into a local copy of the repo without trying to add and fetch the git remote that the pull request is from).

There are lots of keyboard shortcuts. For example, / to jump to the file finder.

Not so much a secret but more like a hiding in plain sight: when looking at a commit GitHub will show you the earliest and latest tag (i.e. release) that includes the commit. For example, this commit[1] first appeared in v3_2_0_preview3.

[1]: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/892f350a7db4d2cc99c5061d...

The title is misleading, just like other commenters mentioned. Just check how much indirection "rb_iv_get()" has to make (at the end, it will call [1], which isn't "a light" call). Now, check generated JIT code (in a blog post) for the same action where JIT knows how to shave off unnecessary indirection.

We are comparing apples and oranges here.

[1] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/b635a66e957e4dd3fed83ef1d7...

I'm not sure why, but all the source values are listed here: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/1cc700907d3ad3368272488a6f...

Maybe someone knowledgeable in the underpinnings of Ruby will explain why "class variable" was not hyphenated.