BTW to improve the reliability of that test I believe you would need a sleep (smaller, e.g. of 0.1) between the Thread.new and assert M.works?, otherwise it's likely the M.works? runs first and then the other thread will see the constant is autoloading and wait, and anyway that thread does not check what is defined on M. For the test to fail it needs to be the Thread.new running first and defining the constant but not yet the method, before the main thread keeps running and call the method.

‘‘I think it lets us be more thoughtful and more deliberate about safety issues,’’ Altman says. ‘‘Part of our strategy is: Gradual change in the world is better than sudden change.’’

def with_something prepare yield on_success end any return, break or throw would skip the on_success code. Skipping over the on_success code also seems quite reasonable when the block calls break and throw. It may not seem like the obvious behaviour for return, but perhaps it is a safe assumption to make in general to think of return as aborting the method yielding to the block. It might be desirable to discourage the use of return in this way for transactions to keep the code clearer, but that would also affect the use of break which seems like a reasonable way to abort a transaction from within the transaction block.

If you're nested inside several blocks and can't use next, rather extract the contents of the transaction into its own method and use return there.

The danger of working at "internet time" is that hasty decisions may be poor, and rapid changes may cause troubling turbulence for many users.

Recent research reported in the journal Cognition offers evidence that brief distractions from a focal task may improve concentration over the longer run: “We propose that deactivating and reactivating your goals allows you to stay focused,” the study’s authors said. “From a practical standpoint, our research suggests that, when faced with long tasks (such as studying before a final exam or doing your taxes), it is best to impose brief breaks on your-self. Brief mental breaks will actually help you stay focused on your task!”28

considering this is just going to the alpha branch I'm going to go ahead with the merge

So even if it works for you, you won't know where it breaks.

The expect wait command returns more arguments if the spawned process is killed but unbuffer just always returns the 3rd argument.

In any case signal handling in shells is one of the least reliable and portable aspects. You'll find behaviours vary greatly between shells and often between different versions of a same shell. Be prepared for some serious hair pulling and head scratching if you're going to try to do anything non-trivial.

Also, this code will fail if $$ is not the process group leader, such as when the script is run under strace. Since a call to setsid(2) is probably tricky from a shell script, one approach might be to ps and obtain the process group ID from that.

you really need #!/bin/sh -m for correct behavior of nested subshells. fg, bg, and wait wont work correctly otherwise

How to wrap long word (text without spaces) in html table’s cell? This is very, very easy! We must add only a CSS proprty to table cell “td” tag – “word-break: break-all;” then all column’s widths become as intended. 

@monkeythedev can your work be used already? I would suggest not yet, i'm still doing core changes every day

A component shouldn’t break because it’s rendered more or less often.

Even if a component is rendered just once, your design will improve if rendering twice doesn’t break it.