[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Re: [ ruby-Bugs-4949 ] segmentation fault while evaluating printf:Kernel

From: "Daniel Berger" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Date: 2006-07-05 18:15:05 UTC
List: ruby-core #8130
noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:
> Bugs item #4949, was opened at 2006-07-05 18:03
> You can respond by visiting: 
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=4949&group_id=426
> 
> Category: Core
> Group: None
> Status: Open
> Resolution: None
> Priority: 3
> Submitted By: Gregor Cramer (gcramer)
> Assigned to: Nobody (None)
> Summary: segmentation fault while evaluating printf:Kernel
> 
> Initial Comment:
> I tried
> 
>   $ ruby -e 'printf("%12378378773f\n", 1.2)'
> 
> on the command line. The result is
> 
>   $ -e:1: [BUG] Segmentation fault
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> You can respond by visiting: 
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=1698&aid=4949&group_id=426
> 

This must be against 1.9, because in 1.8.4 and the 1.8.5 nightly build I get 
"in `printf': width too big (ArgumentError)".

Regards,

Dan

PS - I'm going to ask Tom to put "1.8.x" and "1.9.x" (or maybe a fixed set of 
version numbers) as group field options so that we can more immediately tell 
which version we're dealing with.


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication 
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy 
all copies of the communication and any attachments.


In This Thread