[#61171] Re: [ruby-changes:33145] normal:r45224 (trunk): gc.c: fix build for testing w/o RGenGC — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
(2014/03/01 16:15), normal wrote:
3 messages
2014/03/01
[#61243] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9425] [PATCH] st: use power-of-two sizes to avoid slow modulo ops — normalperson@...
Issue #9425 has been updated by Eric Wong.
4 messages
2014/03/03
[#61359] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs — normalperson@...
Issue #9609 has been reported by Eric Wong.
5 messages
2014/03/07
[#61360] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/07
(2014/03/07 19:09), normalperson@yhbt.net wrote:
[#61362] Re: [ruby-trunk - Bug #9609] [Open] [PATCH] vm_eval.c: fix misplaced RB_GC_GUARDs
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/07
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61424] [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I'm unsure about this. I _hate_ the extra branches this adds;
13 messages
2014/03/12
[#61466] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/13
Hi Eric,
[#61471] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/13
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61508] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/15
(2014/03/14 2:12), Eric Wong wrote:
[#61509] Re: [REJECT?] xmalloc/xfree: reduce atomic ops w/ thread-locals
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/15
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61452] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [Open] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been reported by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/13
[#61496] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9638] [Open] [PATCH] limit IDs to 32-bits on 64-bit systems — normalperson@...
Issue #9638 has been reported by Eric Wong.
4 messages
2014/03/14
[#61568] hash function for global method cache — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
I came upon this because I noticed existing st numtable worked poorly
7 messages
2014/03/17
[#61605] Re: hash function for global method cache
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/03/20
(2014/03/18 8:03), Eric Wong wrote:
[#61606] Re: hash function for global method cache
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/20
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#61631] Re: hash function for global method cache
— =?KOI8-R?B?4NLJyiDzz8vPzM/X?= <funny.falcon@...>
2014/03/22
what's the profit from using binary tree in place of hash?
[#61632] Re: hash function for global method cache
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/03/22
Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@gmail.com> wrote:
[#61687] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9606] Ocassional SIGSEGV inTestException#test_machine_stackoverflow on OpenBSD — normalperson@...
Issue #9606 has been updated by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/26
[#61760] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — normalperson@...
Issue #9632 has been updated by Eric Wong.
3 messages
2014/03/30
[ruby-core:61162] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9192] Inconsistent comparison between Float and BigDecimal
From:
ruby-core@...
Date:
2014-03-01 06:36:02 UTC
List:
ruby-core #61162
Issue #9192 has been updated by Marc-Andre Lafortune. Wolfgang Teuber wrote: > You are exceeding the max precision Float::DIG (http://www.ruby-doc.org/core-2.0.0/Float.html#DIG => "Usually defaults to 15."). Your example uses 17 significant digits, which will ultimately lead to floating point number errors. The doc is misleading. Floats can take from 15 to 17 decimals to be described uniquely. See for example https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/3273 The example float I gave does take 17 decimals. It's not possible to describe that float with less. > The issue you described is not related to Gustavo's issue. I find it difficult to respond when what I wrote seems to me to be so clear. r44073 is an attempt to fix Gustavo's issue. As I stated, I disagree with what r44073 wants to do, but even if it was decided it was the right thing to do, it doesn't even do it correctly, as shown in my counterexample. Hope this helps. ---------------------------------------- Bug #9192: Inconsistent comparison between Float and BigDecimal https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9192#change-45528 * Author: Gustavo Sales * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: Kenta Murata * Category: ext * Target version: * ruby -v: 2.0.0p353 (2013-11-22 revision 43784) [x86_64-darwin11.4.2] * Backport: 1.9.3: UNKNOWN, 2.0.0: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- I was checking a possible inconsistency on ActiveModel and I found situations where comparing BigDecimal to Float differs to comparing Float to BigDecimal. I have create a simple ruby script to exemplify the problem. The script is attach to this issue and output is as follows: Instance number 706.05 ########### Instance number 706.06 Inconsistence: 0.70606E3 > 706.06 706.06 < 0.70606E3 ========= Inconsistence: 0.70606E3 <= 706.06 706.06 >= 0.70606E3 ========= ########### Instance number 706.07 Inconsistence: 0.70607E3 < 706.07 706.07 > 0.70607E3 ========= Inconsistence: 0.70607E3 >= 706.07 706.07 <= 0.70607E3 ========= ########### Instance number 706.08 ########### ---Files-------------------------------- compare_decimal_float.rb (529 Bytes) -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/