[#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,
[ ruby-Bugs-4344 ] :!~ not a symbol
Bugs item #4344, was opened at 2006-05-03 16:41
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=4344&group_id=426
Category: Core
Group: None
>Status: Closed
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Doug Kearns (dkearns)
Assigned to: Nobody (None)
Summary: :!~ not a symbol
Initial Comment:
:!~ is not an instance of Symbol as :=~ is.
irb(main):001:0> :!~.class
SyntaxError: compile error
(irb):1: parse error, unexpected tNMATCH, expecting tSTRING_CONTENT or tSTRING_DBEG or tSTRING_DVAR or tSTRING_END
:!~.class
^
from (irb):1
It might just be due to the fact that tNMatch is not included as part of the "op" symbol in parse.y
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Yukihiro Matsumoto (matz)
Date: 2007-05-10 12:34
Message:
Not a bug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Nobuyoshi Nakada (nobu)
Date: 2007-05-10 09:14
Message:
Not a bug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Murphy (Kornelius Kalnbach) (murphy)
Date: 2006-10-19 07:47
Message:
There are some more operators that aren't methods:
+= -= *= /= **= %=
&= |= ^=
<<= >>=
&&= ||=
!~ != && || .. ... ?:
and or not
So, it's not a bug.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Austin Ziegler (austin)
Date: 2006-05-03 21:12
Message:
I'm not sure that this is a bug. =~ is a legitimate operator, just as == is. != and !~ aren't operators, but are syntactic sugar for !(a == b) and !(a =~ b).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Doug Kearns (dkearns)
Date: 2006-05-03 16:57
Message:
Actually this looks like it might be intentional, if a
little unexpected, since x !~ y is converted to !(x ~= y).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=4344&group_id=426