On Nov 19, 8:48 am, Eric Lavigne <lavigne.e... / gmail.com> wrote:
> > So it would appear that the complexity of my process pays off in
> > time.  Of course, everything is a tradeoff.  I went for speed.  Others
> > aimed for alternate worthwhile goals, such as easy to understand code,
> > succinct code, and/or highly Rubyesque code.
>
> I am new to Ruby and pulling out the pickaxe book for each line of
> code that I write, but none of the entries seem difficult to
> understand. Which entries are Rubyesque?

Well there's no official definition of Rubyesque.  But using monkey
patching to put the encoding function in String and the decoding
function in Integer strikes me as being Rubyesque.  Many of the built-
in classes have a "to_yaml" method, for example, which is another type
of encoding.  I think steve was the first to do that.

Eric