Language involving irrational number is not a CFL
According to Parikh's theorem, if $L$ were context-free then the set $M = \{(a,b) : a \leq \gamma b \}$ would be semilinear, that is, it would be the union of finitely many sets of the form $S = u_0 + \mathbb{N} u_1 + \cdots + \mathbb{N} u_\ell$, for some $u_i = (a_i,b_i)$.

Obviously $u_0 \in M$, and moreover $u_i \in M$ for each $i &gt; 0$, since otherwise $u_0 + N u_i \notin M$ for large enough $N$. Therefore $g(S) := \max(a_0/b_0,\ldots,a_\ell/b_\ell) &lt; \gamma$ (since $g(S)$ is rational). This means that every $(a,b) \in S$ satisfies $a/b \leq g(S)$.

Now suppose that $M$ is the union of $S^{(1)},\ldots,S^{(m)}$, and define $g = \max(g(S^{(1)}),\ldots,g(S^{(m)})) &lt; \gamma$. The foregoing shows that every $(a,b)$ in the union satisfies $a/b \leq g &lt; \gamma$, and we obtain a contradiction, since $\sup \{ a/b : (a,b) \in M \} = \gamma$.



When $\gamma$ is rational, the proof fails, and indeed $M$ is semilinear:
$$
\{ (a,b) : a \leq \tfrac{s}{t} b \} = \bigcup_{a=0}^{s-1} (a,\lceil \tfrac{t}{s} a \rceil) + \mathbb{N} (s,t) + \mathbb{N} (0,1).
$$
Indeed, by construction, any pair $(a,b)$ in the right-hand side satisfies $a \leq \tfrac{s}{t} b$ (since $s = \tfrac{s}{t} t$). Conversely, suppose that $a \leq \frac{s}{t} b$. While $a \geq s$ and $b \geq t$, subtract $(s,t)$ from $(a,b)$. Eventually $a &lt; s$ (since $b &lt; t$ implies $a \leq \frac{s}{t}b &lt; s$). Since $a \leq \frac{s}{t} b$, necessarily $b \geq \lceil \tfrac{t}{s} a \rceil$. Hence we can subtract $(0,1)$ from $(a,b)$ until we reach $(a,\lceil \tfrac{t}{s} a \rceil)$.