On 17 Feb 2011, at 08:49, Xavier Noria wrote: > I wrote this off the top of my head, but if I am not mistaken we have > now a countable number of pairs between (1, 0) and (2, 0). Namely, (1, > 1), (1, 2), .... So, using pseudonotation, ((1, 0)..(2, > 0)).include?((3, 0)) won't even finish in 1.9, while it did before. > > This is just an example to depict why they are not equivalents, it > might be artificial, but I don't know perhaps there's some application > out there assuming this behavior. > Doesn't seem any more artificial than the cases used to justify the 1.9 behaviour.
I've added patch & ticket at https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/6453-use-cover-for-validates_inclusion_of-with-ranges-on-19 . It's not very beautiful though Fred -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
