[#8566] Visions for 2001/1.7.x development? — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

Hi matz and other Ruby developers,

18 messages 2001/01/03
[#8645] Re: Visions for 2001/1.7.x development? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2001/01/04

Hi,

[#8580] bug?? — jmichel@... (Jean Michel)

I don't understand the following behaviour:

19 messages 2001/01/03

[#8633] Interesting Language performance comparisons - Ruby, OCAML etc — "g forever" <g24ever@...>

13 messages 2001/01/04

[#8774] No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...>

So, why not include Comparable in Array by default? It shouldn't have any

28 messages 2001/01/07
[#8779] Re: No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2001/01/07

Hi,

[#8780] Re: No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2001/01/07

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote:

[#8781] Re: No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 2001/01/07

In message "[ruby-talk:8780] Re: No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array"

[#8782] Re: No :<, :>, etc. methods for Array — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2001/01/07

gotoken@math.sci.hokudai.ac.jp (GOTO Kentaro) wrote:

[#8829] Sandbox (again) — wys@... (Clemens Wyss)

Hi,

20 messages 2001/01/08
[#8864] Re: Sandbox (again) — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...> 2001/01/08

On 8 Jan, Clemens Wyss wrote:

[#8931] String confusion — Anders Bengtsson <ndrsbngtssn@...>

Hello everyone,

21 messages 2001/01/09
[#8937] Re: String confusion — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2001/01/09

Hi,

[#8953] Please remove account from files — "Thomas Daniels" <westernporter@...>

Please take my e-mail address from your files and "CANCEL" my =

14 messages 2001/01/09
[#8983] Re: Please remove account from files — John Rubinubi <rubinubi@...> 2001/01/10

On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Thomas Daniels wrote:

[#9020] time to divide -talk? (was: Please remove account from files) — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2001/01/10

At Wed, 10 Jan 2001 14:23:30 +0900,

[#9047] Re: time to divide -talk? (was: Please remov e account from files) — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>

Yasushi Shoji:

27 messages 2001/01/10
[#9049] Re: time to divide -talk? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2001/01/10

At Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:20:45 +0900,

[#9153] what about this begin? — Anders Strandl Elkj誡 <ase@...> 2001/01/11

[#9195] Re: Redefining singleton methods — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "H" == Horst Duch=EAne?= <iso-8859-1> writes:

10 messages 2001/01/12

[#9242] polymorphism — Maurice Szmurlo <maurice@...>

hello

73 messages 2001/01/13

[#9279] Can ruby replace php? — Jim Freeze <jim@...>

When I read that ruby could be used to replace PHP I got really

15 messages 2001/01/14

[#9411] The Ruby Way — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

As a member of the "Big 8" newsgroups, "The Ruby Way" (of posting) is to

15 messages 2001/01/17

[#9462] Re: reading an entire file as a string — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "R" == Raja S <raja@cs.indiana.edu> writes:

35 messages 2001/01/17
[#9465] Re: reading an entire file as a string — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2001/01/17

raja@cs.indiana.edu (Raja S.) writes:

[#9521] Larry Wall INterview — ianm74@...

Larry was interviewed at the Perl/Ruby conference in Koyoto:

20 messages 2001/01/18
[#10583] Re: Larry Wall INterview — "greg strockbine" <gstrock@...> 2001/02/08

Larry Wall's interview is how I found out

[#9610] Re: 101 Misconceptions About Dynamic Languages — "Ben Tilly" <ben_tilly@...>

"Christian" <christians@syd.microforte.com.au> wrote:

13 messages 2001/01/20

[#9761] Re: 101 Misconceptions About Dynamic Languages — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "C" == Christoph Rippel <crippel@primenet.com> writes:

16 messages 2001/01/23

[#9792] Ruby 162 installer available — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

15 messages 2001/01/24

[#9958] Re: Vim syntax files again. — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneik@...>

Hugh Sasse wrote:

14 messages 2001/01/26
[#10065] Re: Vim syntax files again. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...> 2001/01/29

On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, Conrad Schneiker wrote:

[#9975] line continuation — "David Ruby" <ruby_david@...>

can a ruby statement break into multiple lines?

18 messages 2001/01/27
[#9976] Re: line continuation — Michael Neumann <neumann@...> 2001/01/27

On Sat, 27 Jan 2001, David Ruby wrote:

[#9988] Re: line continuation — harryo@... (Harry Ohlsen) 2001/01/28

>A statement break into mutliple lines if it is not complete,

[ruby-talk:9996] Re: Windows bugs

From: "Christoph Rippel" <crippel@...>
Date: 2001-01-28 00:36:18 UTC
List: ruby-talk #9996
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale@crimson.propagation.net [mailto:ale@crimson.propagation.net]
> Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2001 03:11 AM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: [ruby-talk:9977] Re: Windows bugs[]
[..]
> 
> Hello Christoph,
> 
> I wrote just to note this crashes with
> 
>   ruby 1.6.2 (2000-12-25) [i686-linux]
> 
> but doesn't crash with
> 
>   ruby 1.7.0 (2001-01-23) [i686-linux]
[..]
This same is true for cygwin/mingw32 ruby 1.7.0. However this bug
was not fixed for windows in the stable cvs branch as of 2001-01-23
> So something nice has happened. It seems the program is parsed into
> same tree (at least NodeDump output was identical), so it's about
> interpreting the tree.
> 
> There's loads of change log entries regarding different nodes, but saw 
> nothing directly related (but I'm half blind...).
> 
> The stack trace from core dump looks like this:
> 
> (gdb) bt
> #0  0x80f9fb8 in ?? ()
> #1  0x8050df6 in search_method (klass=1075545608, id=3961, origin=0xbfffdbb4)
>     at eval.c:257
> #2  0x8050e32 in rb_get_method_body (klassp=0xbfffdc00, idp=0xbfffdbe4, 
>     noexp=0xbfffdbe8) at eval.c:275
> #3  0x8059418 in rb_call (klass=1075545608, recv=4, mid=3961, argc=0, 
>     argv=0x0, scope=0) at eval.c:4429
> #4  0x8054e90 in rb_eval (self=1075600528, n=0x401b8748) at eval.c:2482
> #5  0x8054a9e in rb_eval (self=1075600528, n=0x401b8720) at eval.c:2459
> #6  0x8057755 in rb_yield_0 (val=148645, self=1075600528, klass=0, acheck=0)
>     at eval.c:3534
> #7  0x8057920 in rb_yield (val=148645) at eval.c:3588
> #8  0x80a6abe in rb_ary_each (ary=1075545628) at array.c:629
> #9  0x8058a53 in call_cfunc (func=0x80a6aa0 <rb_ary_each>, recv=1075545628, 
>     len=0, argc=0, argv=0x0) at eval.c:4121
> #10 0x8058df1 in rb_call0 (klass=1075576388, recv=1075545628, id=3553, argc=0, 
>     argv=0x0, body=0x401bfa70, nosuper=1) at eval.c:4248
> #11 0x8059521 in rb_call (klass=1075576388, recv=1075545628, mid=3553, argc=0, 
>     argv=0x0, scope=0) at eval.c:4452
> #12 0x8054e90 in rb_eval (self=1075600528, n=0x401b8838) at eval.c:2482
> #13 0x80540b8 in rb_eval (self=1075600528, n=0x401b8ba8) at eval.c:2217
> #14 0x8052027 in ruby_run () at eval.c:1166
> #15 0x8050a5b in main (argc=2, argv=0xbffff724, envp=0xbffff730) at main.c:50
> #16 0x4008cb65 in __libc_start_main (main=0x8050a3c <main>, argc=2, 
>     ubp_av=0xbffff724, init=0x804ff18 <_init>, fini=0x80b01bc <_fini>, 
>     rtld_fini=0x4000df24 <_dl_fini>, stack_end=0xbffff71c)
>     at ../sysdeps/generic/libc-start.c:111
> 
> Since #1 seach_method is like this
> 
> static NODE*
> search_method(klass, id, origin)
>     VALUE klass, *origin;
>     ID id;
> {
>     NODE *body;
> 
>     if (!klass) return 0;
>     while (!st_lookup(RCLASS(klass)->m_tbl, id, &body)) {
> 	klass = RCLASS(klass)->super;
> 	if (!klass) return 0;
>     }
> 
>     if (origin) *origin = klass;
>     return body;
> }
> 
> and line 257 where the illegal instruction is executed happens to be the 
> line '}' closing the while block I wonder if this is one of the GCC bugs.
maybe somebody with a ``non-gcc ruby'' should try to run this?
>     - Aleksi
> 
Christoph

In This Thread

Prev Next