[#62297] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap. — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
nari@ruby-lang.org wrote:
7 messages
2014/05/02
[#62307] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap.
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/05/03
(2014/05/03 4:41), Eric Wong wrote:
[#62402] Re: [ruby-cvs:52906] nari:r45760 (trunk): * gc.c (gc_after_sweep): suppress unnecessary expanding heap.
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/05/05
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#62523] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan — ko1@...
Issue #9632 has been updated by Koichi Sasada.
3 messages
2014/05/11
[#62556] doxygen (Re: Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9632] [PATCH 0/2] speedup IO#close with linked-list from ccan) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...>
2014-05-11 8:50 GMT+09:00 Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>:
3 messages
2014/05/13
[#62727] [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
rb_unlink_method_entry may cause old_me to be swept before the new
7 messages
2014/05/24
[#63039] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/06/10
Hi,
[#63077] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/06/10
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#63086] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2014/06/11
(2014/06/11 4:47), Eric Wong wrote:
[#63087] Re: [RFC] vm_method.c (rb_method_entry_make): avoid freed me in m_tbl
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2014/06/11
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#62862] [RFC] README.EXT: document rb_gc_register_mark_object — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Any comment on officially supporting this as part of the C API?
5 messages
2014/05/30
[ruby-core:62487] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7395] [Assigned] Negative numbers can't be primes by definition
From:
mame@...
Date:
2014-05-10 00:20:52 UTC
List:
ruby-core #62487
Issue #7395 has been updated by Yusuke Endoh. Status changed from Closed to Assigned Read the rdoc carefully: > Returns true if +self+ is a prime number, false for a composite. By definition, a composite number can be also a positive integer greater than 1. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CompositeNumber.html Thus, 1.prime? #=> false 0.prime? #=> false (-1).prime? #=> false looks all buggy (or undefined behavior) to me. If we can change the spec, it would be good to raise an exception, return nil, or at least update the rdoc. Anyway, the maintainer (Yugui) should treat this, I think. -- Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp> ---------------------------------------- Bug #7395: Negative numbers can't be primes by definition https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7395#change-46651 * Author: Zachary Scott * Status: Assigned * Priority: Normal * Assignee: Yuki Sonoda * Category: lib * Target version: current: 2.2.0 * ruby -v: 2.0.0 * Backport: ---------------------------------------- from github: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/187 By definition, a prime number can be a positive integer greater than 1. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeNumber.html ---Files-------------------------------- prime_refute_negative_numbers.patch (1.16 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/