[#11890] Ruby and Solaris door library — "Hiro Asari" <asari.ruby@...>

Hi, there. This is my first patch against ruby. I think I followed

19 messages 2007/08/13
[#11892] Re: Ruby and Solaris door library — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/14

Hiro Asari wrote:

[#11899] pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>

Hi,

13 messages 2007/08/14
[#11903] Re: pack/unpack 64bit Integers — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...> 2007/08/15

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 06:50:01AM +0900, Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#11948] Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — David Flanagan <david@...>

I just noticed that my ruby1.9 build of August 17th includes a Fiber

22 messages 2007/08/22
[#11949] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/08/22

David Flanagan wrote:

[#11950] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@...> 2007/08/22

On 8/22/07, Daniel Berger <djberg96@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11952] Re: Fibers in Ruby 1.9? — MenTaLguY <mental@...> 2007/08/22

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:50:12 +0900, "Francis Cianfrocca" <garbagecat10@gmail.com> wrote:

[#11988] String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Vincent Isambart" <vincent.isambart@...>

I saw that Matz just merged his M17N implementation in the trunk.

17 messages 2007/08/25
[#11991] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — "Michael Neumann" <mneumann@...> 2007/08/25

On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:54:20 +0200, Yukihiro Matsumoto

[#11992] Re: String#length not working properly in Ruby 1.9 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/25

Hi,

[#12042] Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — David Flanagan <david@...>

This message contains queries that probably only Matz can answer:

16 messages 2007/08/31
[#12043] Re: Encodings of string literals; explicit codepoint escapes? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/08/31

Hi,

Re: Inverse Square Root

From: "Dave Pederson" <dave.pederson@...>
Date: 2007-08-24 17:30:29 UTC
List: ruby-core #11983
Yes they are.  I remembered (after the fact) that it is an approximation
algorithm and probably doesn't make sense to include in Ruby.  To get more
accurate results you would have to run the following line a couple times:

x = x*(1.5f - xhalf*x*x);

But still...the results will be incorrect or rough.  It is actually slower
too (at least the way I coded it):

When calculating the inverse square root with my Math.isqrt(), the value was
0.999995648860931 and it took  4.0E-6 seconds
When calculating the inverse square root with 1.0/Math.sqrt(), the value was
1.0 and it took  3.0E-6 seconds

I guess the fast inverse square root would only make sense to include iff
someone needed an approximation that didn't rely on division.

Thanks,

-Dave

On 8/24/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> At Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:28:26 +0900,
> Dave Pederson wrote in [ruby-core:11981]:
> > Which gave the following results (which seem correct):
> >
> > 1 - 0.998307168483734
> > 4 - 0.499153584241867
> > 9 - 0.332953214645386
> > 16 - 0.249576792120934
>
> Seem incorrect or quite rough.
>
> --
> Nobu Nakada
>
>

In This Thread