[#7286] Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273 — ara.t.howard@...

On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, Minero Aoki wrote:

23 messages 2006/02/02
[#7292] ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/02/02

[#7293] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — mathew <meta@...> 2006/02/02

mathew wrote:

[#7298] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — James Britt <ruby@...> 2006/02/03

mathew wrote:

[#7310] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — Evan Webb <evanwebb@...> 2006/02/07

I'm not sure we even need the 'with' syntax. Even if we do, it breaks

[#7311] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...> 2006/02/07

On 2006.02.07 10:03, Evan Webb wrote:

[#7313] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — Evan Webb <evanwebb@...> 2006/02/07

Umm, on what version are you seeing a warning there? I don't and never

[#7315] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...> 2006/02/07

On 2006.02.07 14:47, Evan Webb wrote:

[#7316] Re: ANDCALL / iff? / &? (was Re: ruby-dev summary 28206-28273) — Evan Webb <evanwebb@...> 2006/02/07

I'd by far prefer it never emit a warning. The warning is assumes you

[#7305] Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3 — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>

On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 08:33:40PM +0900, Christian Neukirchen wrote:

28 messages 2006/02/05
[#7401] Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2006/02/22

On Feb 5, 2006, at 5:05 AM, Mauricio Fernandez wrote:

[#7414] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/02/23

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 02:21:24PM +0900, Eric Hodel wrote:

[#7428] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/02/26

In article <1140968746.321377.18843.nullmailer@x31.priv.netlab.jp>,

[#7444] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — nobu@... 2006/02/28

Hi,

[#7445] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/02/28

In article <m1FDshr-0006MNC@Knoppix>,

[#7447] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/02/28

In article <87irr047sx.fsf@m17n.org>,

[#7448] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/02/28

In article <87vev0hxu5.fsf@m17n.org>,

[#7465] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — "Evan Webb" <evanwebb@...> 2006/03/01

Just my quick 2 cents...

[#7468] Re: Symbols overlap ordinary objects, especially on OS X (Was: Re: Problem with weak references on OS X 10.3) — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org> 2006/03/01

In article <92f5f81d0602281855g27e78f4eua8bf20e0b8e47b68@mail.gmail.com>,

[#7403] Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9 — Emiel van de Laar <emiel@...>

Hi List,

12 messages 2006/02/22
[#7404] Re: Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9 — George Ogata <g_ogata@...> 2006/02/22

Emiel van de Laar <emiel@rednode.nl> writes:

[#7406] Re: Module#define_method "send hack" fails with Ruby 1.9 — dblack@... 2006/02/22

Hi --

[#7442] GC Question — zdennis <zdennis@...>

I have been posting to the ruby-talk mailing list about ruby memory and GC, and I think it's ready

17 messages 2006/02/27

Re: [PATCH] solaris 10 isinf and ruby_setenv fixes

From: "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
Date: 2006-02-02 04:14:41 UTC
List: ruby-core #7283
>>Hello.
>>
>>>This patch works correctly for me. However there is still the isinf
>trouble
>>>(e.g. configure cannot find isinf on solaris 10)
>>
>>Well, should I commit your patch [ruby-core:7273],
>>or define isinf/isnan in [ruby-core:7151] somewhere?
>
>      The below thing seems to be bit kludge to me. I can test it if
>      you can send me a patch that has it put somewhere.

I'm not sure I understand [ruby-core:7151] well, but when I tried following patch
on TestDrive,

  td189.testdrive.hp.com> ./miniruby -e "p 0.0 / 0.0"
  Infinity

Hmm... OK, I'll commit your patch. We can consider [ruby-core:7151] even after that.

Index: configure.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.212.2.42
diff -u -w -b -p -r1.212.2.42 configure.in
--- configure.in	1 Feb 2006 13:27:47 -0000	1.212.2.42
+++ configure.in	2 Feb 2006 03:57:00 -0000
@@ -436,7 +436,7 @@ AC_FUNC_FSEEKO
 AC_CHECK_FUNCS(ftello)
 AC_REPLACE_FUNCS(dup2 memmove strcasecmp strncasecmp strerror strftime\
 		 strchr strstr strtoul crypt flock vsnprintf\
-		 isnan finite isinf hypot acosh erf)
+		 hypot acosh erf)
 AC_CHECK_FUNCS(fmod killpg wait4 waitpid syscall chroot fsync getcwd eaccess\
 	      truncate chsize times utimes fcntl lockf lstat symlink link\
 	      readlink setitimer setruid seteuid setreuid setresuid\
Index: missing.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/missing.h,v
retrieving revision 1.13.2.3
diff -u -w -b -p -r1.13.2.3 missing.h
--- missing.h	25 Jan 2006 13:30:11 -0000	1.13.2.3
+++ missing.h	2 Feb 2006 03:58:54 -0000
@@ -43,9 +43,11 @@ extern int dup2 _((int, int));
 extern int eaccess _((const char*, int));
 #endif
 
+/*
 #ifndef HAVE_FINITE
 extern int finite _((double));
 #endif
+*/
 
 #ifndef HAVE_FLOCK
 extern int flock _((int, int));
@@ -66,6 +68,7 @@ extern double erf _((double));
 extern double erfc _((double));
 #endif
 
+/*
 #ifndef HAVE_ISINF
 # if defined(HAVE_FINITE) && defined(HAVE_ISNAN)
 # define isinf(x) (!finite(x) && !isnan(x))
@@ -73,10 +76,13 @@ extern double erfc _((double));
 extern int isinf _((double));
 # endif
 #endif
+*/
 
+/*
 #ifndef HAVE_ISNAN
 extern int isnan _((double));
 #endif
+*/
 
 /*
 #ifndef HAVE_MEMCMP
@@ -139,4 +145,30 @@ extern int snprintf __((char *, size_t n
 extern int vsnprintf _((char *, size_t n, char const *, va_list));
 #endif
 
+#ifndef isnan
+# include <math.h>
+# define isnan(x) \
+    (sizeof (x) == sizeof (long double) ? isnan_ld (x) \
+     : sizeof (x) == sizeof (double) ? isnan_d (x) \
+     : isnan_f (x))
+static inline int isnan_f  (float       x) { return x != x; }
+static inline int isnan_d  (double      x) { return x != x; }
+static inline int isnan_ld (long double x) { return x != x; }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef isinf
+# include <math.h>
+# define isinf(x) \
+    (sizeof (x) == sizeof (long double) ? isinf_ld (x) \
+     : sizeof (x) == sizeof (double) ? isinf_d (x) \
+     : isinf_f (x))
+static inline int isinf_f  (float       x) { return isnan (x - x); }
+static inline int isinf_d  (double      x) { return isnan (x - x); }
+static inline int isinf_ld (long double x) { return isnan (x - x); }
+#endif
+
+#ifndef finite
+# define finite(x) (!isnan(x) && !isinf(x))
+#endif
+
 #endif /* MISSING_H */



In This Thread

Prev Next