[#4595] New block syntax — Daniel Amelang <daniel.amelang@...>

I'm really sorry if this isn't the place to talk about this. I've

25 messages 2005/03/21
[#4606] Re: New block syntax — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2005/03/21

Hi --

[#4629] Re: New block syntax — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/03/30

On Monday 21 March 2005 16:17, David A. Black wrote:

[#4648] about REXML::Encoding — speakillof <speakillof@...>

Hi.

15 messages 2005/03/31
[#4659] Re: about REXML::Encoding — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/04/04

On Thursday 31 March 2005 09:44, speakillof wrote:

Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1613 ] Ruby 1.8.2 array of hash entries functions incorrectly

From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2005-03-10 14:22:51 UTC
List: ruby-core #4553
Hi --

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1613 ] Ruby 1.8.2 array of hash entries functions incorrectly"
>    on Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:53:41 +0900, noreply@rubyforge.org writes:
>
> |Running on Solaris 8, Blade 150 and Windows XP. Unable to build and access the contents of an array of hash records that have been constructed over multiple iterators. I've observed that a new hash record appears to replace all previous hash records, and that iterating over the array appears to repeatedly return only one hash record. I observed that a simple array of two hash records does function as expected in irb.
>
> I'm sorry but I don't get the above description.  Can somebody
> elaborate for me?

I don't quite understand it either, but I think it's possible that
he's overwritten some variables accidentally.  Or maybe it's a real
bug, though I would think that something where arrays got truncated
would have been spotted before.

A related question:  do the people who submit bugs actually see the
subsequent discussion on ruby-core?  Are these messages automatically
sent to them?


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net

In This Thread