[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

13 messages 2000/10/02

[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

OK, here is what I think I know.

14 messages 2000/10/11

[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

18 messages 2000/10/11
[#5427] RE: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — OZAWA -Crouton- Sakuro <crouton@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,

[#5429] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...> 2000/10/11

Thanks for the input.

[#5432] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,

[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:

80 messages 2000/10/13
[#5531] Re: Some newbye question — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2000/10/14

Hi,

[#5544] Re: Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...> 2000/10/15

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#5576] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2000/10/16

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:

[#5617] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2000/10/16

Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:

[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>

There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about

16 messages 2000/10/20
[#5712] Re: Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...> 2000/10/20

Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:

[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>

Hello fellow rubyists,

21 messages 2000/10/26

[ruby-talk:5561] Re: Problem with pack on 64-bit machines

From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2000-10-16 05:15:45 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5561
Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:5554] Problem with pack on 64-bit machines"
    on 00/10/16, Wes Nakamura <wknaka@pobox.com> writes:

|I think I've found a problem with ruby 1.6.1 (non-cvs) Array#pack when 
|on a 64-bit machine (in this case, an alpha running linux, so it's
|64-bit little-endian).
|
|e.g.:
|
|>> [1].pack "N"
|=> "\000\000\000\000"
|>> [0x0102030405060708].pack "N"
|=> "\001\002\003\004"
|>> [0x0000000001020304].pack "N"
|=> "\000\000\000\000"

Thank you.  I found two bugs.

  * offset shoule be applied for network byteorder, even on little
    endien machines.

  * integer size should be checked even for unsigned integers.

I think I fixed this.  Try the latest CVS, or soon releasing 1.6.2.
Thank you again.

							matz.
p.s.
I also appreciate the staffs in the Unversity of Tokyo, who supplied me
an account to Alpha Linux machine.

In This Thread