[#955] Ruby 1.4.3 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Ruby 1.4.3 is out, check out:
1 message
1999/12/07
[#961] Ruby compileable by C++ compiler? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Hi,
8 messages
1999/12/10
[#962] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#963] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
1999/12/10
Wei,
[#964] Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Hi,
15 messages
1999/12/10
[#966] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— nakajima kengo<ringo@...>
1999/12/10
Hello Clemens,
[#967] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#989] a question about to_i — Friedrich Dominicus <Friedrich.Dominicus@...>
Sorry, I'm quite new to ruby. But I encounterd the following problem. If
17 messages
1999/12/19
[ruby-talk:00981] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
From:
kjana@... (YANAGAWA Kazuhisa)
Date:
1999-12-12 13:21:49 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #981
In message <14417.10061.869216.572571@gargle.gargle.HOWL> clemens.hintze@alcatel.de writes: > Even after conversion, ANSI-C will not compile it! There are much > warnings and a few errors. E.g. in file 'parse.y', function > 'rb_yyparse', the function 'call_op' will be called three times with > too few arguments in line 715, 727 and 789. It may be bug to be fixed. It seems all call_op() calls with argument shortage are rules for unary operator (`+', `-' and `~'), and adding 0 for last argument (like `$$ = call_op($2, tUPLUS, 0, 0);') is work.... maybe :-P matz? # This is a bug in even K&R style because call_op() is defined as a # function takes 4 arguments. ANSI-C's type checking feature is # effective to detect such type of errors.... -- kjana@os.xaxon.ne.jp December 12, 1999 Every body's business is nobody's business.