[#37730] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4962][Open] come back gem_prelude! — Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>

24 messages 2011/07/02

[#37840] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4985][Open] Add %S[] support for making a list of symbols — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

23 messages 2011/07/07

[#37866] [Backport87 - Feature #4996][Open] About 1.8.7 EOL — Shyouhei Urabe <shyouhei@...>

22 messages 2011/07/08

[#37913] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5003][Open] Enumerator#next segfaults in OS X Lion (10.7) — Ganesh Gunasegaran <ganesh.gunas@...>

16 messages 2011/07/09

[#37917] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5005][Open] Provide convenient access to original methods — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

13 messages 2011/07/09

[#37932] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5008][Open] Equal rights for Hash (like Array, String, Integer, Float) — Suraj Kurapati <sunaku@...>

31 messages 2011/07/09

[#37936] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5010][Open] Add Slop(-like) in stdlib and deprecate current OptionParser API — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

29 messages 2011/07/09

[#37968] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5015][Open] method_added" is called in addition to "method_undefined — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

14 messages 2011/07/10

[#38096] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5033][Open] PATCH: 1.9: gc_mark_children: Avoid gc_mark() tail recursion, use goto again. — Kurt Stephens <ks.ruby@...>

14 messages 2011/07/16

[#38109] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5034][Open] C Source Code formatting — Lazaridis Ilias <ilias@...>

18 messages 2011/07/16

[#38171] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5047][Open] Segfault (most likely involving require) — Jack Christensen <jack@...>

21 messages 2011/07/18

[#38182] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5054][Open] Compress a sequence of ends — ANDO Yasushi ANDO <andyjpn@...>

68 messages 2011/07/19

[#38197] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056][Open] About 1.9 EOL — Shyouhei Urabe <shyouhei@...>

39 messages 2011/07/19
[#38900] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Shota Fukumori <sorah@...> 2011/08/10

[#38902] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2011/08/10

Hi,

[#39048] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2011/08/22

Hi,

[#39055] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5056] About 1.9 EOL — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2011/08/23

On 23/08/11 at 06:50 +0900, SASADA Koichi wrote:

[#38295] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5064][Open] HTTP user-agent class — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>

15 messages 2011/07/21

[#38391] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #5076][Open] Mac OS X Lion Support — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>

17 messages 2011/07/22

[#38503] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5096][Open] offer Logger-compatibility for ext — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

16 messages 2011/07/25

[#38510] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5097][Assigned] Supported platforms of Ruby 1.9.3 — Yui NARUSE <naruse@...>

42 messages 2011/07/26

[#38526] [Backport92 - Backport #5099][Open] Backport r31875 load path performance problem — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

19 messages 2011/07/26

[#38538] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5101][Open] allow optional timeout for TCPSocket.new — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

15 messages 2011/07/27

[#38610] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5120][Open] String#split needs to be logical — Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>

18 messages 2011/07/30

[#38623] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Open] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash — Alexey Muranov <muranov@...>

14 messages 2011/07/31

[ruby-core:37783] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #2756] Issues with Math and Complex behavior on 1.9

From: Yusuke Endoh <mame@...>
Date: 2011-07-04 17:07:05 UTC
List: ruby-core #37783
Issue #2756 has been updated by Yusuke Endoh.

Assignee changed from Yusuke Endoh to Kenta Murata

Hello,

> Q. Should 1.9 coerce arguments to Math methods?
> Q. Can we change the 1.8.7 behavior when raising exceptions to be both internally consistent and consistent with the behavior of 1.9 (Note that numerous changes to the exception raised have already been made in 1.8.5 -> 1.8.6 -> 1.8.7, so this request is not without precedent.) (see http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2754)
> Q. Should the behavior of atanh after requiring lib/complex.rb be the same for non-Complex inputs as before?
> Q. Is lib/complex.rb deprecated or not? If it is, *why* is it deprecated and not removed?
> Q. Is there a definitive document that explains the policy and behavior of Math and Complex in 1.9?


Though there is no official maintainer for both lib/complex.rb and
lib/cmath.rb, I guess mrkn, keiju and tadf have a thorough knowledge
of them.  So pass this ticket to mrkn.

-- 
Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp>
----------------------------------------
Bug #2756: Issues with Math and Complex behavior on 1.9
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/2756

Author: Brian Ford
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Kenta Murata
Category: 
Target version: 1.9.x
ruby -v: ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-02-18 trunk 26704) [i386-darwin9.8.0]


=begin
 This ticket aggregates several issues with Math methods on 1.9. There are related tickets that either have not yet or do not, in my opinion, resolve these issues in a satisfactory manner. (see http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/1708, and related to the behavior of Math http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2189 and to 1.8 behavior http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2754)
 
 1. There are behaviors that are inconsistent with 1.8
 
 # On 1.8, the argument is coerced
 $ ruby1.8.7 -v -e 'o = Object.new; def o.to_f; 0.5; end; p Math.atanh(o)'ruby 1.8.7 (2009-12-24 patchlevel 248) [i686-darwin9.8.0]
 0.549306144334055
 
 # On 1.9, the argement is not coerced
 $ ruby1.9 -v -e 'o = Object.new; def o.to_f; 0.5; end; p Math.atanh(o)'
 ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-02-18 trunk 26704) [i386-darwin9.8.0]
 -e:1:in `atanh': can't convert Object into Float (TypeError)
         from -e:1:in `<main>'
 
 Q. Should 1.9 coerce arguments to Math methods?
 
 # On 1.8, an ArgmentError is raised
 $ ruby1.8.7 -v -e 'p Math.atanh("str")'
 ruby 1.8.7 (2009-12-24 patchlevel 248) [i686-darwin9.8.0]
 -e:1:in `atanh': invalid value for Float(): "str" (ArgumentError)
         from -e:1
 
 # On 1.9, a TypeError is raised
 $ ruby1.9 -v -e 'p Math.atanh("str")'
 ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-02-18 trunk 26704) [i386-darwin9.8.0]
 -e:1:in `atanh': can't convert String into Float (TypeError)
         from -e:1:in `<main>'
 
 Q. In this case, TypeError would appear more correct, so can the 1.8.7 behavior be changed? Also note that changing the 1.8.7 behavior would make it consistent with the behavior of atanh when requiring Complex (see http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2754)
 
 2. There are behaviors that are inconsistent when requiring lib/complex.rb
 
 # The original method raise a TypeError
 $ ruby1.9 -v -e 'p Math.atanh(nil)'
 ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-02-18 trunk 26704) [i386-darwin9.8.0]
 -e:1:in `atanh': can't convert nil into Float (TypeError)
         from -e:1:in `<main>'
 
 # The new method attempts an undefined operation and consequently raises a NoMethodError
 $ ruby1.9 -v -rcomplex -e 'p Math.atanh(nil)'
 ruby 1.9.2dev (2010-02-18 trunk 26704) [i386-darwin9.8.0]
 lib/complex.rb is deprecated
 /Users/brian/devel/ruby19/install/lib/ruby/1.9.1/cmath.rb:196:in `atanh': undefined method `real?' for nil:NilClass (NoMethodError)
         from -e:1:in `<main>'
 
 The same behavior is observed when passing a String.
 
 Q. Should the behavior of atanh after requiring lib/complex.rb be the same for non-Complex inputs as before?
 
 Also, requiring lib/complex.rb on 1.9 causes a warning: "lib/complex.rb is deprecated". But this is not entirely true. As best as I can understand from http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/1708, it was never decided whether complex.rb should require cmath.rb. It appears that there are some behaviors acquired via lib/complex.rb that are not deprecated. In that case, this warning is confusing and misleading.
 
 Q. Is lib/complex.rb deprecated or not? If it is, why is it deprecated and not removed? 1.9 already removes many libraries. Why is this one special and allowed to cause such confusion?
 
 Q. Is there a definitive document that explains the policy and behavior of Math and Complex in 1.9?
 
 
 To summarize the questions in this ticket?
 
 Q. Should 1.9 coerce arguments to Math methods?
 Q. Can we change the 1.8.7 behavior when raising exceptions to be both internally consistent and consistent with the behavior of 1.9 (Note that numerous changes to the exception raised have already been made in 1.8.5 -> 1.8.6 -> 1.8.7, so this request is not without precedent.) (see http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2754)
 Q. Should the behavior of atanh after requiring lib/complex.rb be the same for non-Complex inputs as before?
 Q. Is lib/complex.rb deprecated or not? If it is, *why* is it deprecated and not removed?
 Q. Is there a definitive document that explains the policy and behavior of Math and Complex in 1.9?
 
 Thanks,
 Brian
=end



-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

In This Thread

Prev Next