[#144] Another implementation of Bignum — "Dmitry Antipov" <dmitry.antipov@...>
Hello Ruby hackers,
15 messages
2002/06/06
[#151] Re: Another implementation of Bignum [tarball attached]
— "Dmitry Antipov" <dmitry.antipov@...>
2002/06/07
Hello again,
[#152] Re: Another implementation of Bignum [tarball attached]
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/07
Hi,
[#174] Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps — Matthew Bloch <mattbee@...>
re: this problem I had a few weeks back:
8 messages
2002/06/19
[#177] Re: Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/20
Hi,
[#178] Re: Improving Ruby's garbage collector for interactive apps
— Matthew Bloch <mattbee@...>
2002/06/21
On Thursday 20 June 2002 18:54, you wrote:
[#186] Steps to get multiple interpreters per process... — Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
Can someone chart out what would need to happen to get multiple ruby
10 messages
2002/06/24
[#187] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2002/06/25
Hi,
[#188] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— Sean Chittenden <sean@...>
2002/06/25
> |Can someone chart out what would need to happen to get multiple
[#191] Re: Steps to get multiple interpreters per process...
— Chris Ross <chris@...>
2002/06/25
Re: Bignum bug
From:
matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date:
2002-06-14 03:45:17 UTC
List:
ruby-core #170
Hi,
In message "RE: Bignum bug"
on 02/06/14, "Christoph" <chr_news@gmx.net> writes:
|> You get the same result from Python too.
|>
|> 10L**400 + 10L**400 > 0.0 + 10L**400 # false
|
|Which version are you using?
I was using Python 2.1.3.
matz.