Issue #14588 has been updated by Anon92929 (Anon Ymous).


I suggest that those who think that passing new types of exceptions upstream as asserts is not a BUG are the ones who need to learn programming, not myself. Force-closing actual bug reports and banning users because you think your little math sub-library should feature that new breaking "assert" statement, which breaks peoples' codebases is a symptom of more than just one little "." that broke the camel's back.

----------------------------------------
Bug #14588: math library functions should NOT raise exceptions
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14588#change-70884

* Author: Anon92929 (Anon Ymous)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
* ruby -v: 
* Backport: 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN, 2.5: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
BigDecimal, Integer, Float, none of these should raise exceptions, but they should all fail SILENTLY or return NaN during error cases.

I shouldn't have to go fix every possible way that BigDecimal might throw a breaking change in a thousand places in my codebase. I need math libraries that DON'T BREAK!!!


BUG RESUBMITTED. 

The bug was rejected at github because I was referred to open a ticket at ruby-lang.org.

The bug was rejectet at ruby-lang.org because the ticket was closed at github.

Not cool, guys.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>