106660-122661 subjects 107039-107484

ruby as FP and OO, history of smalltalk and scheme
106824 [sean.zuzu@gm] someone said earlier (sorry that i'm too lazy to properly attribute,

Compiling Ruby code
106837 [news.home.nl] Once in a while the question pops up if it is possible to compile Ruby
+ 106838 [bob.news@gm ] "Nospam" <news.home.nl-1@nospam.no-nonsense.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 106839 [mneumann@nt ] I remember that a long time ago, there was a ruby-to-c compiler (was it
| + 106840 [srubin@fs sy] Yes, I have to vote for a bytecode compiler.  Right now I'm using ruby
| | 106876 [mailinglists] Use ExErb, in version 3.2 it stores the node trees. So this is true
| | + 106878 [srubin@fs sy] Lothar,
| | | + 106881 [Ara.T.Howard] how about a simple 'ruby-interpreter' server written as a drb object.  the
| | | | 106900 [vjoel@PA H. ] Cool idea. It's been in the back of my mind to do something like that.
| | | | 106958 [srubin@fs sy] While this is a good idea, and actually may prove useful for me in the
| | | + 106921 [mailinglists] Okay then we need to port the stuff to Linux, it's not so difficult to
| | |   106940 [JRoshan@bl .] ...
| | |   106949 [Ruben.Vandeg] As has been said before, there _is_ a way to redistribute your
| | |   106955 [curt@hi bs c] These are excellent solutions. Unfortunately, they only work for Windows.
| | |   + 106956 [JRoshan@bl .] ...
| | |   | + 106964 [flgr@cc n. e] I don't know if this is also true for RubyScript2Exe, but the
| | |   | + 106966 [Ruben.Vandeg] I noticed that too, that you already have 900k for something tiny, but
| | |   + 106960 [Ruben.Vandeg] Yep, you are right, it would be interesting to have tools similar as
| | |     + 106981 [dave.baldwin] Under Mac OS X an application presents itself as an executable file,
| | |     | + 107010 [drossruby@ya] That is not the point of having a native compiler. The
| | |     | + 107049 [eyez@il uz o] This is correct. 1.6 ships with panther and up, 1.8 will be in tiger.
| | |     + 106991 [curt@hi bs c] There is no actual work going on. What you read was my desire to add more
| | |     + 107036 [pan@er kv en] I think it's possible to make a RubyScript2Exe for Linux. Even
| | |       107046 [mailinglists] Read Chapter 3 from
| | |       107047 [mailinglists] Sorry hit the send button to quickly.
| | + 107650 [billk@ct .c ] I read this with much interest (!) ... However I just
| |   107651 [mailinglists] I must say i didn't look at it exactly but in the source code of
| |   107714 [rcoder@gm il] This chunk (from 'src/mod_bruby/mod_bruby.cpp' in the exerb-3.2.0
| |   107718 [vjoel@PA H. ] Don't know whether this qualifies as quick, but why not just put your
| |   107724 [rcoder@gm il] Joel,
| + 106874 [mailinglists] AFAIK it only packed the ruby code as a C string and called eval. Very
+ 106841 [DocBoobenste] It is generally difficult to create a compiler for interpreted
+ 106847 [surrender_it] I agree that this could be done, linking the runtime for dynamic
+ 106856 [kristof@vl e] Yes, that's possible, but depending on the C code you write, there
| 106857 [phubuh@ph bu] That's not strictly true.  If you convert the code to
| 106861 [kristof@vl e] That's interesting.  Could you explain how that works?
| 106869 [phubuh@ph bu] In continuation-passing style, no expressions ever return.  When you
+ 106862 [drossruby@ya] The answer is really yes. Why? People say no because
| 106864 [gsinclair@so] My fearless prediction: no-one will write a Ruby specification if you
| 106868 [drossruby@ya] I do not know if I can look at the source to make a
| 106962 [ser@ge ma e-] Hey David,
| 106992 [curt@hi bs c] I'd love to see one two!
| 106994 [surrender_it] IIRC Robert Feldt's student should end his 'ruby on the clr' project
+ 106901 [usenet2@no p] Thanks all for the interesting read. I don't need my Ruby code to be

rcrchive superseed fails
106844 [mneumann@nt ] I just tried to superseed RCR265, but it failed with internal server
107367 [dblack@wo bl] I'll try to do some testing and figure out why.  Sometimes these

(Simple) Tracing with Ruby
106846 [christoph.ne] I'm  using ruby 1.6.8 (2002-12-24) [i586-mswin32]
+ 106848 [bob.news@gm ] "Christoph Neubauer" <christoph.neubauer@siemens.com> schrieb im
| 106850 [christoph.ne] Thanks, I'll follow that link
| 106851 [bob.news@gm ] "Christoph Neubauer" <christoph.neubauer@siemens.com> schrieb im
+ 106853 [flgr@cc n. e] Moin!

Java ResourceBundle like class in Ruby
106852 [ehames@gm il] class in Ruby. Basically, what I need is hash which is initialized by
+ 106854 [halostatue@g] Something like PStore might be what you need. I'm not sure, as I've
+ 106867 [bob.news@gm ] "Edgardo Hames" <ehames@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| 106884 [ehames@gm il] I don't understand the parent member. Is it the fall back bundle it is
| 106941 [bob.news@gm ] "Edgardo Hames" <ehames@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 106880 [surrender_it] maybe you can use an hash and set the default value as a proc that
+ 106887 [ahoward@no a] ~ > cat a.rb
| 106943 [bob.news@gm ] "Ara.T.Howard" <ahoward@noaa.gov> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 106932 [nahi@ke na t] Though I have not yet understood what you need clearly, when you are

using rdoc to document dynamically-generated classes
106855 [pbrannan@at ] I have a number of classes that are dynamically generated at the time my
106858 [dave@pr gp o] If you're writing in 'C', and if you know the names ofthe classes
106866 [pbrannan@at ] How do I document the methods of the class using this technique?
106875 [dave@pr gp o] That's difficult, because presumably you're using the same method body
106892 [pbrannan@at ] I will have to think about this for a while.  It's definitely not

DBUnit for Ruby?
106860 [djberg96@ho ] Is there anyone out there working on something like DBUnit for Ruby?
+ 106863 [mneumann@nt ] Looks like ActiveRecords's Fixtures. No?
+ 106865 [shanko_date@] I am working on TUnit (which is a more specific

Ruby Course
106877 [spam0504@bs ] here at my university we want to give some summer courses organized by

str_buf safety
106886 [cmills@fr es] VALUE str_buf;
106888 [cmills@fr es] VALUE str = rb_str_new(buf, len);

Ruby legalities & The Ruby Foundation
106891 [ptkwt@ar cn ] There have been several posts recently about the legality of using Ruby in
+ 106893 [lyle.johnson] I don't have a problem with Ruby's license, but I've not yet been in
| 106903 [jamesUNDERBA] That makes sense.  While an informed and educated statement about the
+ 106899 [bg-rubytalk@] A lawyer licensed in what jurisdiction?  Answering what question?

Simple Solution to Ruby Licensing Issues/Misunderstandings
106904 [nospam@no pa] After hearing a lot of confusion abour ruby licensing, I decided to
106905 [aredridel@nb] #5: Get OSI to list the license.
106906 [nospam@no pa] That doesn't solve the problem of people not understanding the license
106912 [discord@ma .] Or how about this: Ruby is dual-licensed; it can be used under the Ruby
107008 [ehames@gm il] Is that allowed by the mix-in mechanism supported by Ruby ;-)
107028 [ptkwt@ar cn ] module LGPL

106908 [harryo@zi .c] I've just started reading "Mastering Regular Expressions" because, while
+ 106911 [nospam@no pa] It would be great if Onigurama can be selected as drop-in replacement
| + 106918 [harryo@qi so] Agreed.  I was going to suggest that, but thought better of it, since I don't know how ready for production it is.
| | 106944 [surrender_it] well, oniguruma is being around for years, the 1.0 version is dated
| + 106919 [discord@ma .] If you get Onigurama from the cvs, it states in the README (i think)
| | 106973 [tom@in oe he] If someone wants to set up a "Ruby 1.8.x with Onigurama".tar.gz, I'd be
| | 106974 [aredridel@nb] I would, but it is -rather- easy to make it go with 1.8 yourself. I've
| + 107079 [roberto@RE O] On FreeBSD systems, one has just to specify "WITH_ONIGURUMA=yes" with
|   107157 [muellerix@gm] Just did that and it works like a charm!
+ 106913 [horacio.lope] Oniguruma would make it in 1.9
| 106914 [halostatue@g] It is my understanding that 1.9 already uses Oniguruma as its default
| 106916 [batsman.geo@] The numbering policy has changed. What you describe applied up to 1.8,
+ 106915 [gsinclair@so] Is it not possible/practical to use Onigurama as a separate library?
  106945 [surrender_it] it should be, see gyazmail reachable from

Ruby/Tk article on macdevcenter
106909 [ptkwt@ar cn ] Phil
+ 106910 [cyclists@nc ] Timely. I'm just about to embark on my first Ruby/Tk application.
+ 106937 [martindemell] Sadly the guy seems rather new to Ruby - his overloaded initialize method
+ 106942 [surrender_it] ruby -e "self.puts 'ciao' "
  106969 [Stephan.Kaem] puts is - as the error message says, a privat method.
  106970 [decoux@mo lo] svg% ruby -e 'Kernel.puts "I am a Kernel module function"'
  106972 [surrender_it] well, but since
  106976 [decoux@mo lo] yes and no

GC with OLE Automation
106920 [ssk@ch l. os] I access MS Excel using OLE Automation with Ruby.
106926 [sdate@ev re ] Sam,
106927 [ssk@ch l. os] Thank you for replying.
106953 [sdate@ev re ] Yes, I see the same problem with irb. But remember irb does

freeRIDE ML down?
106922 [mortonda@dg ] I sent a message to the freeRIDE users list
106923 [curt@hi bs c] Hmmm... I'm not aware of it being down, but it does have a very low traffic

Re: [FR-users] RE: freeRIDE ML down?
106928 [mortonda@dg ] It made it this time.  :/

Net::SSH difficulties
106929 [hal9000@hy e] I just installed Net::SSH 0.0.3 and started to play with it.
106961 [jgb3@em il b] Hal,
106968 [hal9000@hy e] ruby -v yields: ruby 1.8.2 (2004-07-08) [i686-linux]
106971 [jgb3@em il b] ruby -ropenssl -e "p OpenSSL::PKey::DH.instance_method(:g)"
106975 [hal9000@hy e] $ ruby -ropenssl -e "p OpenSSL::PKey::DH.instance_method(:g)"
106977 [jgb3@em il b] I would certainly expect the .so to have a similar timestamp to the .rb.
106980 [hal9000@hy e] OK, thanks, I will rebuild and try it again after lunch.

Material on teaching ruby (Was: Ruby Course)
106935 [spam0504@bs ] I thought about my post and decided that the subject line did not say
106948 [armin@xs .d ] I can email you the open-office source.
+ 106954 [DocBoobenste] your couse description feels like "A survey of Ruby". How about using
+ 106982 [feldt@ce ch ] I introduced an OO pseudolanguage in lecture 8 in my SW Eng course last

bug in uri standard library ?
106959 [dmertz@fr e.] There seem to be a bug in the regexps appearing in lib/uri/common.rb.

thread safe?
106979 [snowzone5@ho] i see that a number of modules are declared 'thread safe?'
106983 [drbrain@se m] The methods inside them can be called concurrently from multiple
106990 [snowzone5@ho] thread safe?
+ 107014 [bob.news@gm ] "tony summerfelt" <snowzone5@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| 107109 [snowzone5@ho] thread safe?
+ 107016 [drbrain@se m] I didn't explain it very well, and my definition may be a little off
  107111 [snowzone5@ho] thread safe?
  107112 [ehames@gm il] You should. That's what a mutex is for. I believe Robert meant that no

Skipping an ancestor method
106984 [adam@ta ew r] I'd like to call a particular inherited method rather than the one in
+ 106985 [mneumann@nt ] alias object__to_s to_s
+ 106993 [pit@ca it in] Object.instance_method( :to_s ).bind( self ).call
  + 106999 [flgr@cc n. e] For the fun of it I've taken this to the extreme and called it
  | + 107102 [retnuh@ei co] Should this take a block, for completeness?
  | | 107104 [flgr@cc n. e] # Like super this calls methods from the inheritance chain which this
  | + 107106 [retnuh@ei co] Should this take a block, for completeness?
  + 107315 [adam@ta ew r] That did the trick -- thanks!

Please e-mail Google to help the Ruby Garden Wiki
106986 [no_replies@f] I have sent the following e-mail message to suggestions@google.com. It's an
+ 106987 [rcoder@gm il] This would make much more sense as a 'meta' tag value, or even as a
+ 106989 [walker@le ha] robots.txt ?
| + 106995 [discord@ma .] Glancing at the specs, it seems that the benefits of someone posting
| | 107019 [drbrain@se m] <META NAME=3D"ROBOTS" CONTENT=3D"NOFOLLOW, NOINDEX">
| + 107006 [no_replies@f] Greg,
+ 107021 [drbrain@se m] an

VB(ish) replacement
106988 [NOSPAMdbolan] The other day I was asked if there is an open source replacement for VB6
+ 106996 [flgr@cc n. e] Ruby has all these features. Blocks are a very handy tool for high-level
+ 106997 [lbates@sw mi] Others have answered most of the other questions.
| + 107000 [cmills@fr es] As easy as or easier than Ruby?
| + 107003 [mneumann@nt ] Ruby has this all, too ;-)
| + 107005 [flgr@cc n. e] Using these new keywords I had another look at RAA and also found
| + 112264 [horacio.lope] For the rest, you have Ruby
|   112265 [horacio.lope] oh, might I add...
+ 106998 [srubin@fs sy] I'm fairly certain you can use python and glade together to make cross
+ 107026 [jjl@po ox co] Can't speak for Ruby, but I'm fairly sure both Perl and Python do fine
| 107110 [claird@la rd] I'm going to complexify the story slightly:  I'm unconvinced about
| 107457 [snowzone5@ho] i don't think there's an easier way to write a gui app than tcl/tk.
| + 107471 [gsinclair@so] What about Ruby/Tk?  How does that compare?
| + 107518 [tom@in oe he] Good times!
+ 112249 [jkugler@bi f] Gnome basic, now dead.  However, mbas, the Mono Basic *is* alive and well,
  112259 [lyle.johnson] Wrong, but no need for a flame war. ;)
  112261 [rff_rff@re o] I guess you missed an implicit " ;) " :)

openssl not getting built
107001 [hal9000@hy e] I'm building the July 20 snapshot on Fedora 1.
107004 [jgb3@em il b] Where is your ssl.h located? Mine's at /usr/include/openssl/ssl.h ... Is
107007 [hal9000@hy e] That's just it -- it doesn't seem to be *anywhere*. And yet it would seem
+ 107009 [ahoward@no a] if you use something evil, like rpms, you can easily have *.so files but not
| 107011 [hal9000@hy e] OK, but the ones I have are all under ruby directories... I'm pretty sure
| + 107015 [jgb3@em il b] Ah, sorry Hal. That answers the question in my last email. I thought you
| | 107020 [hal9000@hy e] The grep for ruby was just a dumb mistake of course.
| | + 107023 [tom@in oe he] [tom@hal tom]$ rpm -qil openssl-devel | grep "ssl\.h"
| | + 107024 [rt@al m. pi ] Well, yeah -- you don't need to have the headers installed for
| |   + 107025 [hal9000@hy e] Interesting, I somehow thought it did. Add that to the list of
| |   + 107066 [rasputnik@he] reduces clutter???
| + 107018 [ahoward@no a] ok.  i meant installing openssl via rpms.
|   107022 [hal9000@hy e] I guess I assumed that if it was under the ruby tree, it didn't come directly
+ 107013 [jgb3@em il b] Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but you indicated in your original post
  107017 [ahoward@no a] or

[ANN] Copland 0.4.0 "Rodeo"
107012 [jgb3@em il b] Copland is an "Inversion of Control" (IoC), or "Dependency Injection"
+ 107077 [david@lo dt ] Congratulations on the release. You do a good job of documenting
| 107137 [jgb3@em il b] Flattery'll get you nowhere. :)
+ 107138 [ruby-talk@wh] Yeah, you've done an incredible job documenting.  It's all nice and
  107145 [jgb3@em il b] Thanks, _why. That's very kind of you to say. Not to turn this into a

Safe Ruby Environment
107027 [mneumann@nt ] Okay, there are the different $SAFE levels. But why not simply removing
+ 107034 [achou@te le ] ...
+ 107038 [surrender_it] I'm not sure, but maybe you simply want a thread running at $SAFE>4
  107043 [mneumann@nt ] Not that I need this feature, but I'd like it :-)
  107071 [flgr@cc n. e] # Runs passed code in a relatively safe sandboxed environment.
  107074 [decoux@mo lo] it always an error to evaluate the result with a different value of $SAFE
  107076 [flgr@cc n. e] Hm, right. It was an old version, sorry for that. This one should work
  107081 [decoux@mo lo] it depend how you use the object after this ...
  107097 [flgr@cc n. e] Hm, which means that I have to call secure_object recursively on all
  + 107098 [decoux@mo lo] You have found, aa was
  + 107099 [flgr@cc n. e] And secure_object needs to raise an Exception when

Now a different Net:SSH error...
107029 [hal9000@hy e] Thanks Jamis, Tom, Josh, Ara...
+ 107030 [jgb3@em il b] Ah, yes. This is on my TODO list. I suspect, if you were to do a cat on
| 107031 [hal9000@hy e] Quite right, I have a couple of pairs at the top.
| 107032 [jgb3@em il b] Ouch. Yah, that makes sense. I guess I'm reading all the available keys
| + 107033 [hal9000@hy e] Well, it seems to be hanging now... I'll break it soon and look at the
| + 107037 [cc1@ce .w st] Those pairs are from people running ssh-keygen from ssh.com.  I don't
|   107142 [jgb3@em il b] That's what I needed to know. Thanks, Charles! I'll experiment with the
+ 107040 [daniel@ni ht] I get this error when I try to use a key with a pass phrase.  The top of
  107143 [jgb3@em il b] What is your patch? I'd be curious to see it. For now, I just wrapped