[#99115] [Ruby master Bug#17023] How to prevent String memory to be relocated in ruby-ffi — larskanis@...
Issue #17023 has been reported by larskanis (Lars Kanis).
22 messages
2020/07/10
[#99375] [Ruby master Feature#17055] Allow suppressing uninitialized instance variable and method redefined verbose mode warnings — merch-redmine@...
Issue #17055 has been reported by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).
29 messages
2020/07/28
[#101207] [Ruby master Feature#17055] Allow suppressing uninitialized instance variable and method redefined verbose mode warnings
— merch-redmine@...
2020/12/02
Issue #17055 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).
[#101231] Re: [Ruby master Feature#17055] Allow suppressing uninitialized instance variable and method redefined verbose mode warnings
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2020/12/03
What does this mean?
[ruby-core:99191] [Ruby master Feature#16470] Issue with nanoseconds in Time#inspect
From:
mame@...
Date:
2020-07-16 09:32:01 UTC
List:
ruby-core #99191
Issue #16470 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh).
We need to understand the use case precisely. Does OP want to pass a general Float value to `Time.utc`? Or does he just want to specify nanosecond?
I think of no practical use case for the former (passing a general/calculated Float). If we need to specify nanosecond, I don't think that Float is a good API for that. `Time.utc(2007, 11, 1, 15, 25, 0, nanosecond: 123456789)` or something is better.
In addition, the following point is wrong.
> The nanosecond value 8483885939586761/68719476736000000 can be expanded to 0.12345678900000001.
A correct expansion is `0.123456789000000004307366907596588134765625`. So, which is better?
```
t.inspect # => "2007-11-01 15:25:00 8483885939586761/68719476736000000 UTC"
t.inspect # => "2007-11-01 15:25:00.123456789000000004307366907596588134765625 UTC"
```
Personally, I prefer the latter to the former because decimal is much easier to understand.
However, I'm afraid if the expansion might be very long. Truncation is a possible, of course. But, it will break the original reason why the fraction part is added in Time#inspect (#15958):
> But recently we encounters some troubles the comparison of Time objects whose frac parts are different.
So, naive truncation may bring the same troubles again. I guess nanosecond (nine digits after the decimal point) would be enough in many use cases, but I'm not 100% sure.
----------------------------------------
Feature #16470: Issue with nanoseconds in Time#inspect
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16470#change-86572
* Author: andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
----------------------------------------
Ruby 2.7 added nanosecond representation to the return value of `Time#inspect` method.
Nanosecond is displayed as `Rational` as in the following example:
```ruby
t = Time.utc(2007, 11, 1, 15, 25, 0, 123456.789)
t.inspect # => "2007-11-01 15:25:00 8483885939586761/68719476736000000 UTC"
```
The nanosecond value `8483885939586761/68719476736000000` can be expanded to `0.12345678900000001`. This is different from the stored nanosecond:
```ruby
t.nsec # => 123456789
t.strftime("%N") # => "123456789"
```
I assume it isn't expected, and will be fixed.
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>