[#35027] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4352][Open] [patch] Fix eval(s, b) backtrace; make eval(s, b) consistent with eval(s) — "James M. Lawrence" <redmine@...>

Bug #4352: [patch] Fix eval(s, b) backtrace; make eval(s, b) consistent with eval(s)

16 messages 2011/02/01

[#35114] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4373][Open] http.rb:677: [BUG] Segmentation fault — Christian Fazzini <redmine@...>

Bug #4373: http.rb:677: [BUG] Segmentation fault

59 messages 2011/02/06

[#35171] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4386][Open] encoding: directive does not affect regex expressions — mathew murphy <redmine@...>

Bug #4386: encoding: directive does not affect regex expressions

9 messages 2011/02/09

[#35237] [Ruby 1.9-Bug#4400][Open] nested at_exit hooks run in strange order — Suraj Kurapati <redmine@...>

Bug #4400: nested at_exit hooks run in strange order

12 messages 2011/02/15

[ruby-core:35357] Re: eval'ing large strings runs out of stack space?

From: "Martin J. Dst" <duerst@...>
Date: 2011-02-24 01:02:23 UTC
List: ruby-core #35357
Hello Roger,

On 2011/02/24 5:28, Roger Pack wrote:
> Hello all.
> This code:
>
> eval (['000000000']*500000).inspect

This doesn't result in a large string, but in a large array.

> with 1.9.2 (but not jruby)
>
> causes this:
>
> das_inspect:0: stack level too deep (SystemStackError)

This may be related to http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/982.
Or it may not. In bug 982, an explicit array literal is causing the 
problem (the first ruby invocation on the command line just creates a 
ruby program with a long array literal, the stack overflow occurs in the 
second ruby invocation (after the pipe).

> Is this expected?

It shouldn't.

Regards,   Martin.

-- 
#-# Martin J. Dst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp

In This Thread