[#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-Patches-1909 ] -Wall -W patch: bignum.c
Patches item #1909, was opened at 2005-05-13 11:19
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1700&aid=1909&group_id=426
Category: Ruby1.8
>Group: v1.8.x
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 3
Submitted By: Daniel Berger (djberg96)
Assigned to: Nobody (None)
Summary: -Wall -W patch: bignum.c
Initial Comment:
--- bignum.orig Fri May 13 11:50:21 2005
+++ bignum.c Fri May 13 11:56:54 2005
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@
VALUE x;
{
if (!FIXNUM_P(x)) {
- long len = RBIGNUM(x)->len;
+ unsigned long len = RBIGNUM(x)->len;
BDIGIT *ds = BDIGITS(x);
while (len-- && !ds[len]) ;
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@
unsigned long n;
{
BDIGIT_DBL num = n;
- long i = 0;
+ unsigned long i = 0;
BDIGIT *digits;
VALUE big;
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@
{
unsigned LONG_LONG q;
long neg = 0;
- long i;
+ unsigned long i;
BDIGIT *digits;
VALUE big;
@@ -324,8 +324,7 @@
char sign = 1, nondigit = 0;
int c;
BDIGIT_DBL num;
- long len, blen = 1;
- long i;
+ unsigned long i, len, blen = 1;
VALUE z;
BDIGIT *zds;
@@ -455,7 +454,7 @@
z = bignew(len, sign);
zds = BDIGITS(z);
for (i=len;i--;) zds[i]=0;
- while (c = *str++) {
+ while ((c = *str++)) {
if (c == '_') {
if (badcheck) {
if (nondigit) goto bad;
@@ -544,7 +543,7 @@
unsigned LONG_LONG n;
{
BDIGIT_DBL num = n;
- long i = 0;
+ unsigned long i = 0;
BDIGIT *digits;
VALUE big;
Everything is still good:
>ruby test_bignum.rb
Loaded suite test_bignum
Started
...
Finished in 0.505683 seconds.
3 tests, 164 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Tom Copeland (tom)
Date: 2006-04-26 17:57
Message:
Testing to ensure comments still work for logged in users...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Tom Copeland (tom)
Date: 2006-04-26 17:55
Message:
Crikey, there was another bug - Artifact.addMessage() wasn't checking for allowAnon(). Bleah!
Ok, let's see how this works now...
tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Tom Copeland (tom)
Date: 2006-04-26 12:39
Message:
Hm. Spam is still appearing... odd. Must be something else. I'm monitoring this patch now and will keep cleaning it up until I can figure out what's up.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Tom Copeland (tom)
Date: 2006-04-26 06:34
Message:
Done. No more 'enter an email address' workaround. Spammers begone!
tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Tom Copeland (tom)
Date: 2006-04-26 06:31
Message:
Hm, looks like spammers have figured out the "enter an email address" thing, removing that now...
tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Nobody (None)
Date: 2006-04-24 10:55
Message:
test
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1700&aid=1909&group_id=426