[#11073] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10527, was opened at 2007-05-02 14:42
Hi,
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:51:18PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
This seems to make valgrind much happier.
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:14:35PM +0900, Paul Brannan wrote:
Hi,
Now 'a' shows up twice in the local table:
Hi,
[#11082] Understanding code: Kernel#require and blocks. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
I'm trying to debug a Rails application which complains about an
On 5/4/07, Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, George wrote:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 06:18:19PM +0900, Hugh Sasse wrote:
[#11108] pattern for implementation-private constants? — David Flanagan <david@...>
Hi,
I believe there isn't a way, but I don't think it's really necessary. Just
[#11127] Bugs that can be closed — "Jano Svitok" <jan.svitok@...>
I propose closing these bugs as invalid:
[#11145] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1 — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #10739, was opened at 2007-05-10 22:06
Hi,
[#11169] Allow back reference with nest level in Oniguruma for Ruby again — =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Wolfgang_N=E1dasi-Donner?= <wonado@...>
Remark: I posted this text in comp.lang.ruby first, but Matz told me,
Does it make sense or is it required to write this as a RCR?
[#11176] FileUtils.rm_rf misfeature? — johan556@...
Hi!
[#11210] Pathname ascend and descend inclusive parameter — TRANS <transfire@...>
I would like to suggest that Pathname#ascend and Pathname#descend
[#11234] Planning to release 1.8.6 errata — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>
Hi all.
On 25/05/07, Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#11252] Init_stack and ruby_init_stack fail to reinit stack (threads problem?) — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #11134, was opened at 2007-05-25 12:14
Hi,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
[#11255] ruby_1_8_6 build problem (make install-doc) — johan556@...
Hi!
[#11271] providing better support through rubyforge tracker categories — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I'm going to make more categories for the trackers (bugs and patches)
[#11367] BUG: next in lambda: 1.8.6 differs from 1.8.4 and 1.9.0 — David Flanagan <david@...>
A toplevel next statement in a lambda does not return a value in 1.8.6,
[#11368] $2000 USD Reward for help fixing Segmentation Fault in GC — Brent Roman <brent@...>
Hi Brent,
question about frame_unique
I was reading the source code for ruby 1.8.6, and a thought occurrred to me. Consider: - Assume we're running on a 32-bit system that has a limit of 2**32-1 for unsigned long. - frame_unique starts at 0. Assume some amount of work has been done and it reaches some number, say 20. - The script makes 2**32-1 method invocations and pushes and pops 2**32-1 frames. - frame_unique is incremented 2**32-1 times. Its value should now be 19. - On the next method invocation, when the frame is pushed, frame_unique will be incremented to 20, and the next frame's uniq value will be the same as the previous frame's. Ruby can now no longer distinguish between the two frames, even though they are distinct frames. I don't know what the implications are of this, so I don't have a test case. It's seems though that in a very long running ruby script that this could be a real problem. I don't see any simple way around it, though. A similar problem exists with block_unique. Paul