Merge branch 'master' of github.com:lifo/docrails

2 files changed, 12 insertions, 17 deletions

diff --git a/railties/guides/source/active_support_core_extensions.textile b/railties/guides/source/active_support_core_extensions.textile
index 1c82a2941f..7b3878d222 100644
--- a/railties/guides/source/active_support_core_extensions.textile
+++ b/railties/guides/source/active_support_core_extensions.textile
@@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ NOTE: Defined in +active_support/core_ext/object/instance_variables.rb+.
 h5. +instance_values+
 
 The method +instance_values+ returns a hash that maps instance variable names without "@" to their
-corresponding values. Keys are strings both in Ruby 1.8 and 1.9:
+corresponding values. Keys are strings:
 
 <ruby>
 class C
@@ -704,13 +704,11 @@ module X
   end
 end
 
-X.local_constants    # => ["X2", "X1", "Y"], assumes Ruby 1.8
-X::Y.local_constants # => ["X1", "Y1"], assumes Ruby 1.8
+X.local_constants    # => [:X1, :X2, :Y]
+X::Y.local_constants # => [:Y1, :X1]
 </ruby>
 
-The names are returned as strings in Ruby 1.8, and as symbols in Ruby 1.9. The method +local_constant_names+ always returns strings.
-
-WARNING: This method returns precise results in Ruby 1.9. In older versions of Ruby, however, it may miss some constants in case the same constant exists in the receiver module as well as in any of its ancestors and both constants point to the same object (objects are compared using +Object#object_id+).
+The names are returned as symbols. The method +local_constant_names+ always returns strings.
 
 NOTE: Defined in +active_support/core_ext/module/introspection.rb+.
 
@@ -737,8 +735,8 @@ Math.qualified_const_get("E") # => 2.718281828459045
 </ruby>
 
 These methods are analogous to their builtin counterparts. In particular,
-+qualified_constant_defined?+ accepts an optional second argument in 1.9
-to be able to say whether you want the predicate to look in the ancestors.
++qualified_constant_defined?+ accepts an optional second argument to be
+able to say whether you want the predicate to look in the ancestors.
 This flag is taken into account for each constant in the expression while
 walking down the path.
 
@@ -759,12 +757,12 @@ end
 +qualified_const_defined?+ behaves this way:
 
 <ruby>
-N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X", false) # => false (1.9 only)
-N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X", true)  # => true (1.9 only)
-N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X")        # => false in 1.8, true in 1.9
+N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X", false) # => false
+N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X", true)  # => true
+N.qualified_const_defined?("C::X")        # => true
 </ruby>
 
-As the last example implies, in 1.9 the second argument defaults to true,
+As the last example implies, the second argument defaults to true,
 as in +const_defined?+.
 
 For coherence with the builtin methods only relative paths are accepted.
@@ -2238,9 +2236,6 @@ The last point is particularly worth comparing for some enumerables:
 <ruby>
 Array.wrap(:foo => :bar) # => [{:foo => :bar}]
 Array(:foo => :bar)      # => [[:foo, :bar]]
-
-Array.wrap("foo\nbar")   # => ["foo\nbar"]
-Array("foo\nbar")        # => ["foo\n", "bar"], in Ruby 1.8
 </ruby>
 
 There's also a related idiom that uses the splat operator:
diff --git a/railties/guides/source/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.textile b/railties/guides/source/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.textile
index 92cb0774de..4fa7fd40c8 100644
--- a/railties/guides/source/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.textile
+++ b/railties/guides/source/contributing_to_ruby_on_rails.textile
@@ -380,9 +380,9 @@ Now you need to get other people to look at your patch, just as you've looked at
 
 h4. Iterate as Necessary
 
-It’s entirely possible that the feedback you get will suggest changes. Don’t get discouraged: the whole point of contributing to an active open source project is to tap into community knowledge. If people are encouraging you to tweak your code, then it’s worth making the tweaks and resubmitting. If the feedback is that your code doesn’t belong in the core, you might still think about releasing it as a plugin.
+It’s entirely possible that the feedback you get will suggest changes. Don’t get discouraged: the whole point of contributing to an active open source project is to tap into community knowledge. If people are encouraging you to tweak your code, then it’s worth making the tweaks and resubmitting. If the feedback is that your code doesn’t belong in the core, you might still think about releasing it as a gem.
 
-And then...think about your next contribution!
+And then ... think about your next contribution!
 
 h3. Rails Contributors