[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: math.c, acosh.h, domain_check, MS Windows - possible bug

From: Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
Date: 2007-02-03 02:09:50 UTC
List: ruby-core #10178
Hi,

At Sat, 3 Feb 2007 05:33:58 +0900,
Berger, Daniel wrote in [ruby-core:10174]:
> I noticed that, based on the Changelog, the domain_check() helper
> function was added to math.c to see if isnan() returns true and, if it
> does, an Errno::ERANGE or Errno::EDOM error is raised. Otherwise, a
> method will return "Infinity". But, there seems to be a discrepancy
> between UNIX and MS Windows.

atanh(1) in missing/acosh.c tries log(2.0 / 0.0) / 2, but
division by 0.0 yields infinity but nothing fails, and
log(infinity) yields infinity too.

According to SUS [1], atan(1) should raise ERANGE as on
Solaris.  But atanh(3) on x86 Linux also seems to set errno
EDOM.

It feels better to check the range in math_atanh().

[1] http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/acosh.html

-- 
Nobu Nakada

In This Thread

Prev Next