[#9644] Determinant Problem in Matrix.rb — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7001, was opened at 2006-12-01 03:50
This is 100% intended. You have to learn integer arithmetics when you
[#9654] Float numbers comparison — "Paulo Soeiro" <pcsoeiro@...>
Hi,
On 12/1/06, Paulo Soeiro <pcsoeiro@gmail.com> wrote:
[#9661] Dir.exist? — Kornelius Kalnbach <murphy@...>
hi!
[#9664] Bigdecimal isn't comparable — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7045, was opened at 2006-12-04 19:20
On 12/4/06, noreply@rubyforge.org <noreply@rubyforge.org> wrote:
[#9685] Segmentation fault - bignorm() — ico@... (Ico Doornekamp)
[#9713] Sets and String subclasses — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7253, was opened at 2006-12-13 12:26
> I would expect the second puts to return 5, not nil. In fact, I'd expect s.to_a[0] to return the same object as a.
[#9722] Kernel#system broken inside Dir.chdir(&block) if system command doesn't have shell characters — <noreply@...>
Bugs item #7278, was opened at 2006-12-14 13:59
Hi,
I bet your script /usr/local/bin/p4 is a shell script which doesn't have a
On Dec 14, 2006, at 18:57, Michael Selig wrote:
[#9725] Fixes going into 1.8.5.9 — "Zev Blut" <rubyzbibd@...>
Hello,
[#9749] System V IPC in standard library? — Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@...>
Back in August, I needed a semaphore to serialize access to an external
Hi,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
Hi,
[#9753] CVS freeze — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
* Shugo Maeda (shugo@ruby-lang.org) wrote:
[#9794] Fwd: [Vit-core] Ruby 1.8.5-p2 Stable Version download bug-fix confusion. — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
The following is a complaint we received about the Ruby home page today.
[#9797] Where to start — "Strong Cypher" <cypherstrong@...>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[#9803] RDoc patch that fixes rb_const_define output — <noreply@...>
Patches item #7499, was opened at 2006-12-30 05:23
On 12/30/06, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
On Dec 30, 2006, at 19:16, Daniel Berger wrote:
On Dec 31, 2006, at 24:31, Eric Hodel wrote:
[#9816] merge YARV — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Hi,
Re: [ ruby-Bugs-6820 ] #ancestors never includes the singleton class (inconsistent)
Hi,
In message "Re: [ ruby-Bugs-6820 ] #ancestors never includes the singleton class (inconsistent)"
on Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:55:33 +0900, dblack@wobblini.net writes:
|I tend to agree. Anonymous classes are visible in ancestors, and
|singleton classes are anonymous classes. They are special in the
|sense that they can't be instantiated, but I don't see why they should
|be treated as special when reflecting on ancestry.
I just remembered I made decision that singleton classes (or
eigenclasses) were "real" anonymous classes rather than theoretical
place holder. That means having singleton classes in ancestors list
makes sense. I will change the behavior in the future.
This is a step toward eigenclass method.
matz.