Comments on: Is IronRuby mathematically challenged? https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/ Meditations on programming, startups, and technology Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:50:18 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Give Ruby.NET 0.9 some love | Zen and the Art of Ruby Programming https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-1414 Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:50:18 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-1414 […] should not be confused with IronRuby, the alternative project I mentioned in a couple of posts, a few months ago. There are several differences between the two projects, but I feel that […]

]]> By: IronRuby?????-- IronRuby: a promising start - cnblogs.com https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-870 Sun, 05 Aug 2007 03:41:33 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-870 […] Antonio Cangiano?????????????????????????quick starts??????????????????????????????? […]

]]> By: In praise of IronRuby's Source Code https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-860 Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:02:17 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-860 […] my previous post about IronRuby, I expressed optimism while pointing out issues with the first pre-alpha release. […]

]]> By: YashLabs » Blog Archive » Hacking IronRuby https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-849 Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:17:31 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-849 […] early pre-Alpha stage (so you should expect incompleteness and bugs). Antonio Cangiano wrote a long post about this, but this first release is under Microsoft’s Permissive License, so that anyone can look at […]

]]> By: Daniele Alessandri https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-848 Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:54:08 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-848 I’m digging through the source code of IronRuby and I find it quite elegant and understandable, I’m enjoying it and it seems pretty easy to spot and than fix bugs or implement missing methods or functionalities. I hope to see a growing lot of contributors around IronRuby, but the start was good and I’m very optimistic 🙂

]]> By: Josh Nursing https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-846 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:32:50 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-846 Hi Antonio,

I’ve written quite a detailed tutorial on how to easily hack IronRuby and extend it using Visual C#. It’s here:

http://www.yashlabs.com/wp/?p=145

Best

]]> By: Seo Sanghyeon https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-828 Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:44:44 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-828 See http://fepy.blogspot.com/2007/07/teaching-ironruby-math-tricks.html for my answer to this enquiry.

]]> By: Doug https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-826 Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:23:54 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-826 Probably these are just bugs. If it doesn’t behave the same as regular ruby, it is a bug. Remember ironruby is only a 2 day old preview release.

Looking at Lam’s announcement, I also see this:

require ‘System.Windows.Forms, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089’

“Notice how you need to use the fully-qualified assembly name in require.”

That is awful. Hopefully they’ll fix that too.

]]> By: John Lam https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-825 Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:23:16 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-825 Hi Antonio,

You’re correct – we haven’t implemented many numerical operations. You can look at the source code in FixnumOps and FloatOps to see exactly the extent of our implementation.

If you want to have some fun, try implementing the code that would fix the behavior in the 1/3.0 case that you described. It should only take about a minute or two.

We also have a very efficient BitNumber library (look under the Microsoft.Scripting directory) that we developed for IronPython (and that Ruby.Net uses in their implementation).

But we haven’t had the chance to hook up those methods yet. In prioritizing the features for this release, it was roughly:

1) Get block/method dispatch working using efficient DLR mechanisms.
2) Get control flow semantics working
3) Get some basic types working: Array, String
4) Get .NET interop working

Hope that helps,
-John

]]> By: Konrad https://programmingzen.com/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-823 Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:47:04 +0000 http://antoniocangiano.com/2007/07/26/is-ironruby-mathematically-challenged/#comment-823 >>> 1.0/3.0
System.MissingMethodException: undefined local variable or method `/’ for 1:Float
at Ruby.Builtins.Kernel.MethodMissing(CodeContext context, Object self, Proc proc, SymbolId name, […]

>>> 2**3
System.MissingMethodException: undefined local variable or method `**’ for 2:Fixnum
at Ruby.Builtins.Kernel.MethodMissing(CodeContext context, Object self, Proc proc, SymbolId name, […]

Why don’t rewrite the post after IronRuby gets these methods implemented?

]]>