[#24105] [Bug #1711] Marshal Failing to Round-Trip Certain Recurisve Data Structures — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>

Bug #1711: Marshal Failing to Round-Trip Certain Recurisve Data Structures

9 messages 2009/07/01

[#24116] [Bug #1715] Numeric#arg for NaN is Inconsistent Across Versions — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>

Bug #1715: Numeric#arg for NaN is Inconsistent Across Versions

10 messages 2009/07/02

[#24240] [Bug #1755] IO#reopen Doesn't Fully Associate with Given Stream on 1.9; Ignores pos on 1.8 — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>

Bug #1755: IO#reopen Doesn't Fully Associate with Given Stream on 1.9; Ignores pos on 1.8

8 messages 2009/07/09

[#24321] [Bug #1773] Gem path doesn't honor user gem? — Lin Jen-Shin <redmine@...>

Bug #1773: Gem path doesn't honor user gem?

12 messages 2009/07/14

[#24390] [Feature #1784] More encoding (Big5 series) support? — Lin Jen-Shin <redmine@...>

Feature #1784: More encoding (Big5 series) support?

12 messages 2009/07/16

[#24467] Re: [ruby-cvs:31226] Ruby:r24008 (ruby_1_8_6): Removed private on to_date and to_datetime. — Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@...>

Hello.

10 messages 2009/07/21

[#24472] [Feature #1800] rubygems can replace system executable files — Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA <redmine@...>

Feature #1800: rubygems can replace system executable files

13 messages 2009/07/21

[#24530] [Feature #1811] Default BasicSocket.do_not_reverse_lookup to true — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Feature #1811: Default BasicSocket.do_not_reverse_lookup to true

9 messages 2009/07/23

[#24624] [Bug #1844] Immediates Should Not Respond to :dup — Run Paint Run Run <redmine@...>

Bug #1844: Immediates Should Not Respond to :dup

15 messages 2009/07/30

[ruby-core:24216] Re: [Bug #1715] Numeric#arg for NaN is Inconsistent Across Versions

From: Matthias Wächter <matthias@...>
Date: 2009-07-08 21:03:50 UTC
List: ruby-core #24216
tadayoshi funaba wrote:
> you wrote:
>> p a*a      # => Complex(Infinity, Infinity), expected: Complex(Infinity, 0.0)
> 
> i tested some implementations.
> 
>                 gosh: +inf.0+inf.0i
>                guile: +inf.0+inf.0i
>              larceny: +inf.0+inf.0i
>             mzscheme: +inf.0+inf.0i
>              ypsilon: +inf.0+inf.0i
>               gambit: +inf.0+inf.0i
>                  gcc: +inf+inf
>              python3: (inf+infj)
>                perl5: inf+infi
>                  ghc: Infinity :+ Infinity
>                 hugs: inf :+ inf
>               octave: Inf + Infi
>               squeak: Infinity + Infinity
> 
> your opinion seems to be very very minority.

You are right, my fault. while it _is_ Complex(Infinity, Infinity), it 
would have an arg of 0.0, though. :-)

> and i've never seen arg(0) return NaN.

That’s pure math. I think folks hate to see NaNs (and the associated 
traps or exceptions in some languages) in trivial examples like that, 
but NaN would be correct. Still, most people set it to some reasonable 
value like 0.0 by convention, but not by math.

In any case, Complex.polar(0.0, NaN) must return Complex(0.0, 0.0) 
instead of Complex(NaN, NaN).

Thanks,
– Matthias

In This Thread

Prev Next