[#70252] Re: [ruby-cvs:58640] nobu:r51492 (trunk): node.c: NODE_ALLOCA for ALLOCV — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Besides possible backwards compatibility, can we drop volatile
3 messages
2015/08/05
[#70257] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI — ko1@...
Issue #11420 has been reported by Koichi Sasada.
11 messages
2015/08/06
[#70337] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/11
Nice. Thank you guys for looking into this.
[#70349] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/12
Btw, did you consider using flexible array to avoid extra malloc
[#70355] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Юрий Соколов <funny.falcon@...>
2015/08/12
I thought to suggest to embed hash_id_table directly into places when it is
[#70356] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
2015/08/12
On 2015/08/13 4:29, Юрий Соколов wrote:
[#70358] Re: [Ruby trunk - Feature #11420] [Open] Introduce ID key table into MRI
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2015/08/12
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
[#70509] [Ruby trunk - Misc #11276] [RFC] compile.c: convert to use ccan/list — ko1@...
Issue #11276 has been updated by Koichi Sasada.
3 messages
2015/08/21
[#70639] the undefined behavior of an iterator if it is modified inside of the block to which it yields — Daniel Doubrovkine <dblock@...>
(this is my first time e-mailing list list, so apologies for any misstep :)
4 messages
2015/08/31
[ruby-core:70482] [Ruby trunk - Bug #11471] min, min_by, max, max_by with optional parameter return a wrong value
From:
lcorr005@...
Date:
2015-08-20 22:07:03 UTC
List:
ruby-core #70482
Issue #11471 has been updated by Leo Correa.
Helder Pereira wrote:
> Leo Correa, I think your patch will fail for this example:
>
> ~~~
> [2, 4, 8, 6, 7].min(4) #=> [2, 4, 6, 8]
> ~~~
I made a test case for that and passed with [2, 4, 6, 7]
----------------------------------------
Bug #11471: min, min_by, max, max_by with optional parameter return a wrong value
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11471#change-53885
* Author: Tsuyoshi Sawada
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* ruby -v:
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
This is reported in StackOverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/32121749/why-20-13-14-min2-13-20. Sometimes `min`, `min_by`, `max`, `max_by` with an optional parameter return a wrong value.
[20, 32, 32, 21, 30, 25, 29, 13, 14].min(2) # => [13, 20]
[20, 32, 32, 21, 30, 25, 29, 13, 14].min_by(2, &:itself) # => [13, 20]
[0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 3, 2].max(2) # => [3, 1]
[0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 3, 2].max_by(2, &:itself) # => [3, 1]
---Files--------------------------------
enum_bug_fix.patch (2.05 KB)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/