[#11073] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #10527, was opened at 2007-05-02 14:42

14 messages 2007/05/02
[#11142] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/05/10

Hi,

[#11188] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10527 ] segfault printing instruction sequence for iterator — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2007/05/16

On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 04:51:18PM +0900, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#11234] Planning to release 1.8.6 errata — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>

Hi all.

17 messages 2007/05/25

Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10739 ] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1

From: Bertram Scharpf <lists@...>
Date: 2007-05-19 03:56:18 UTC
List: ruby-core #11205
Am Freitag, 11. Mai 2007, 01:48:30 +0900 schrieb Bertram Scharpf:
> Am Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007, 22:38:50 +0900 schrieb noreply@rubyforge.org:
> > Bugs item #10739, was opened at 2007-05-10 22:06
> > http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=10739&group_id=426
> > >Status: Closed
> > Summary: Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1
> > 
> > Initial Comment:
> > irb(main):001:0> r = Rational.new! 0, 100
> > => Rational(0, 100)
> > irb(main):002:0> r.zero?
> > => false
> > irb(main):003:0> r == 0
> > => false
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Comment By: Nobuyoshi Nakada  (nobu)
> > Message:
> > Not a bug.
> > Do not use Rational.new! directly.
> 
> So why then it is defined at all?
> 
> Is it really neccessary to reveal one ist subtracing 0 from
> the numerator before comparing it to zero?

No answers. So this definitely corresponds to POLS?

Bertram


-- 
Bertram Scharpf
Stuttgart, Deutschland/Germany
http://www.bertram-scharpf.de

In This Thread