Ticket #13 (closed defect: fixed)
Ruby 1.9.1 require causes error
| Reported by: | anshul | Owned by: | deveiant |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | high | Milestone: | |
| Component: | Framework | Version: | 1.0.5 |
| Severity: | critical | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description
$ ruby --version ruby 1.9.1p243 (2009-07-16 revision 24175) [x86_64-linux] $ irb irb(main):001:0> require 'linguistics' ArgumentError: invalid byte sequence in UTF-8 from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics/iso639.rb:24:in `===' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics/iso639.rb:24:in `block in <module:Linguistics>' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics/iso639.rb:22:in `each' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics/iso639.rb:22:in `<module:Linguistics>' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics/iso639.rb:14:in `<top (required)>' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics.rb:29:in `require' from /usr/lib64/ruby/gems/1.9.1/gems/Linguistics-1.0.5/lib/linguistics.rb:29:in `<top (required)>' from (irb):1:in `require' from (irb):1 from /usr/bin/irb:12:in `<main>'
This is on the latest ruby stable and the latest linguistics stable.
Attachments
Change History
Changed 9 months ago by anshul
-
attachment
ruby.1.9.patch
added
comment:1 Changed 9 months ago by anshul
I am not upto speed with Ruby 1.9 encoding so I am not entirely sure if this is the recommended way of reading oneself but it does seem to work on my system.
Other than this 1.0.5 throws a few warnings here and there but does the job mostly.
comment:2 Changed 9 months ago by deveiant
- Status changed from new to assigned
Hey, thanks for the report and especially for the patch! I've been using a patched version myself under 1.9.1 for a while now, but I wasn't in a hurry to release anything new as I didn't think anyone still used this library. I guess I should have released it anyway, eh? :)
comment:3 Changed 9 months ago by anshul
You most certainly should have and please do! It's a nice library really. I initially used it a year ago in a text analysis project. These days I use it to allow some convention based configuration in the dsl of my personal projects. Thanks for writing it and making it available.
Also, require 'linguistics'. I am certainly not the only one! ;)

Fix?