Consider the attached code. Imho, the clone of class C is broken. But
maybe I'm mistaken...
1. Is this behaviour intended?
2. Any workarounds?
I'm using irb 0.9.5(05/04/13) and ruby 1.9.0 (2008-10-04 revision
19669).
Kind regards
Attachments:
http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/5863/log.txt
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Hi,
It works on 1.8 so it must be 1.9 bug.
matz.
In message "Re: Class#clone broken?" on Mon, 7 Feb 2011 03:25:57 +0900, Anton Zeuchert <moridin@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> writes:
Consider the attached code. Imho, the clone of class C is broken. But
maybe I'm mistaken...1. Is this behaviour intended?
2. Any workarounds?I'm using irb 0.9.5(05/04/13) and ruby 1.9.0 (2008-10-04 revision
19669).Kind regards
Attachments:
http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/5863/log.txt--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Wow, sensational response time... 
thx.
Could you kindly direct me to a contact point where I can report this
bug?
Btw, I would resort to 1.8, but unfortunately the class I'm trying to
clone is a descendant of BasicObject. :-<
Kind regards
Anton
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote in post #979920:
Hi,
It works on 1.8 so it must be 1.9 bug.
matz.
In message "Re: Class#clone broken?" > on Mon, 7 Feb 2011 03:25:57 +0900, Anton Zeuchert > <moridin@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> writes:
>
>Consider the attached code. Imho, the clone of class C is broken. But
>maybe I'm mistaken...
>
>1. Is this behaviour intended?
>2. Any workarounds?
>
>I'm using irb 0.9.5(05/04/13) and ruby 1.9.0 (2008-10-04 revision
>19669).
>
>Kind regards
>
>Attachments:
>http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/5863/log.txt
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Hi,
In message "Re: Class#clone broken?" on Mon, 7 Feb 2011 04:37:19 +0900, Anton Zeuchert <moridin@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> writes:
Wow, sensational response time...
Could you kindly direct me to a contact point where I can report this
bug?