[#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: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2007-05-19 04:07:30 UTC
List: ruby-core #11207
In message "Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10739 ] Rational comparison to 0 fails when denominator is != 1"
    on Sat, 19 May 2007 12:56:18 +0900, Bertram Scharpf <lists@bertram-scharpf.de> writes:

|> 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?

Document for Rational#new! says

  # Implements the constructor.  This method does not reduce to lowest terms or
  # check for division by zero.  Therefore #Rational() should be preferred in
  # normal use.

So you need to be responsible for consequence when you use new!
directly.  It's basically for internal use.

|No answers. So this definitely corresponds to POLS?

Never mention POLS.  It's useless here.

							matz.

In This Thread

Prev Next