153666-154682

153444-154820 subjects 153730-162409

^ [OT] Sudoku again: How to find a sudoku?
153666 [r_mueller im] What i like to know, is how could you know, that a sudoku-like number table is
+ 153680 [alchen vt.ed] For those of you interested in pursuing some more Sudoku programming,
+ 153705 [james graypr] The solution I discussed in the summary does distinguish between
| 153754 [email55555 g] This may help you ...
+ 154012 [r_mueller im] Many thanks for the links!!!

^ Win32OLE_EVENT and threading
153669 [jagenheim gm] I have a application which recieves events asynchronously.

^ Method behaves differently when called using #send
153672 [rm_rails che] I'm having difficulty using #send to call methods in
+ 153675 [dblack wobbl] I wonder whether it's YAML-related.  The YAML library defines
| 153718 [rm_rails che] I guess one part of my question was more along the lines of
| + 153720 [dblack wobbl] ruby -e 'def x; end; x; send(:x)'
| + 153721 [Daniel.Berge] I wouldn't think so.  At least, my own experiments didn't reveal this to be an
+ 153719 [matz ruby-la] It shouldn't.  I'm afraid it's a bug, but I have too few information
+ 153723 [calamitas ad] Maybe it has something to do with method_missing. I suspect object es has
  + 153745 [rm_rails che] Ah yes!!! That seems to be the case.
  | 153749 [SimonKroeger] Wow Peter, nice one to figure that out!
  + 153828 [matz ruby-la] Although this explains the situation, I admit this is confusing.  I
    + 153832 [dblack wobbl] What's the 'f' in 'fcall'?  (I'm just wondering why it's not 'mcall'.)
    + 153833 [dblack wobbl] Kernel#send
    | 153835 [matz ruby-la] It's bit different from my sense of dangerousness, but let me
    | + 153836 [james_b neur] I like it. It strikes me as having better semantic value than fcall.
    | | 153837 [james graypr] I agree.  It's been my favorite option from this thread.
    | | 153838 [shortcutter ] +1
    | | 153839 [jeff.darklig] +1
    | | 153841 [ruby-ml magi] AOL! +1
    | + 153938 [dooby d10.ka] [replying to David]
    |   + 153949 [transfire gm] BUT this would BREAK old programs. Many of us have depended on the fact
    |   | + 153954 [langstefan g] a.meth
    |   | | 154002 [transfire gm] I was just demoing the syntax --I should have shown an iterpolating
    |   | + 154040 [matz ruby-la] Right.  But Ruby2 is the only place to make it happen, when we want to
    |   | | 154049 [transfire gm] via interpolation
    |   | + 154094 [halostatue g] Maybe it should be __send__ that allows access past private controls
    |   |   154096 [transfire gm] Do you hate ugly children too? Just kidding. I understand. :-)
    |   + 153963 [dblack wobbl] Actually Matz has always said that while most ! methods perform
    |   | + 153967 [jeff.darklig] It breaks encapsulation for anything to call a private method other than
    |   | | 153975 [rampant gmai] We have open classes remember :)
    |   | | + 153983 [dblack wobbl] And I think Matz's goal in this is to "purify" send, isolating the
    |   | | + 153988 [jeff.darklig] Yes but adding/taking away from an object doesn't change it's
    |   | |   + 153989 [dblack wobbl] irb(main):005:0> obj = Object.new
    |   | |   + 153996 [discordantus] It is already possible; in fact, it's bordering on routine. There are
    |   | + 153972 [dooby d10.ka] I knew there were exceptions but that's a good example
    |   | + 154105 [matz ruby-la] The point is not being destructive or not, since it's OK in a bang
    |   |   + 154107 [dblack wobbl] Then why do you want to have a separate method for it? :-)
    |   |   | 154110 [matz ruby-la] Because I felt they are different, as I said above.  I admit fcall is
    |   |   | + 154115 [dblack wobbl] I guess I still think of the difference as a kind of mild "danger"
    |   |   | | + 154149 [logancapaldo] Going with #instance_eval, how about #instance_send ? #instance_send
    |   |   | | + 154241 [chneukirchen] I very much like Austin's idea, to make #send not call private
    |   |   | |   154242 [dblack wobbl] My problem with that is that the point of __send__ is to keep the name
    |   |   | |   154286 [chneukirchen] No, not really... if you want others to allow reusing "send", you can
    |   |   | |   154289 [dblack wobbl] I'm afraid I'm losing track.  __fcall__ would be the same as send, and
    |   |   | |   154308 [chneukirchen] Ok, then we disagree. :-)
    |   |   | |   154326 [dblack wobbl] We already have a danger sign for method names: !  And __ is already
    |   |   | |   154449 [chneukirchen] The problem is that lots of classes redefine #send, just because the
    |   |   | |   154458 [dblack wobbl] Oh, I see what you mean.  I guess it would be __send__ and __send__!
    |   |   | + 154204 [matz ruby-la] OK, here's another idea.  How about
    |   |   |   + 154210 [transfire gm] At first glance that seems amazingly logical. But on second thought it
    |   |   |   | 154213 [matz ruby-la] foo.instance_eval{
    |   |   |   | + 154218 [ruby-ml magi] While this would certainly work, I have to say I think essentially
    |   |   |   | | 154223 [matz ruby-la] I'm not sure what is your concern.  I haven't introduced new context,
    |   |   |   | + 154287 [transfire gm] Matz, this whole thing of "protecting the programmer" via name games
    |   |   |   | | + 154291 [james graypr] This isn't the reason a change to send() is being considered.
    |   |   |   | | | 154301 [transfire gm] I'm not talking about the reason for the change to send(), but the
    |   |   |   | | + 154297 [eric_mahurin] That's one of my reasons for using send over instance_eval.
    |   |   |   | + 154304 [lukfugl gmai] I like it. One of my favorite suggestions from the above thread was
    |   |   |   |   154314 [transfire gm] Nice, that would suffice (IMHO)
    |   |   |   |   154330 [lukfugl gmai] Oh, and just looking at this again after your reply, I noticed the the
    |   |   |   |   154332 [transfire gm] He he. That's kind of funny. Think I suggest this with
    |   |   |   |   154349 [brockweaver ] How about
    |   |   |   |   + 154353 [SimonKroeger] thanks for making me laugh out loud!
    |   |   |   |   + 154356 [dblack wobbl] I think you'd want to pass through the private methods before
    |   |   |   + 154225 [eric_mahurin] Here is my 2 cents based on my usage --
    |   |   |   | 154253 [james graypr] Are you sure you've set the method's scope correctly in the first
    |   |   |   | 154272 [eric_mahurin] Usually, I use it to access protected/private methods of core
    |   |   |   | 154470 [daniel brock] I prefer using Module#public to nuke access restrictions
    |   |   |   | 154493 [daniel brock] class Module
    |   |   |   + 154226 [jeffw global] This would mean calling send(:bar) is more or less equivalent to calling bar()
    |   |   |   + 154247 [eric_mahurin] Doing this would make the semantics for calling Object#send
    |   |   |   | + 154248 [dblack wobbl] I think Matz's suggestion above actually simplifies the picture.  It
    |   |   |   | | 154471 [daniel brock] By the way, why not let `self.foo' bypass access
    |   |   |   | + 154252 [james graypr] I disagree completely.  It would make send() function THE SAME as
    |   |   |   | | 154266 [eric_mahurin] We are talking about different things.  I agree that this
    |   |   |   | | 154276 [dblack wobbl] I see what you mean; it's very magic.  I can't think of a way to
    |   |   |   | | + 154288 [calamitas ad] Actually... Here's an implementation using the very thing that started
    |   |   |   | | | + 154290 [dblack wobbl] I was trying to avoid method_missing, since there's only one to a
    |   |   |   | | | + 154292 [calamitas ad] class Object
    |   |   |   | | |   154312 [eric_mahurin] How about a version that allow classes to override send and
    |   |   |   | | |   154317 [calamitas ad] I never said it was a good idea, I was just pointing out that it is
    |   |   |   | | + 154311 [levin grunde] There could be a new method "explicit_receiver?" that is 'magic' in the
    |   |   |   | |   154315 [transfire gm] That would be bad in that it would create "bifocal methods", ie.
    |   |   |   | + 154294 [eric_mahurin] I just thought of a few more scenarios that should be thought
    |   |   |   |   154303 [transfire gm] ...
    |   |   |   + 154250 [james graypr] I really like that, for what it's worth.
    |   |   |   | 154265 [ruby.brian g] +1
    |   |   |   + 154256 [halostatue g] Like Eric, this could break some of my code. I don't have a problem
    |   |   + 154151 [daryl brandy] I'm a Smalltalker, so I agree that characterizing this as "dangerous" is
    |   |   | + 154154 [logancapaldo] It's not  a potential side-effect, its a bug that doesn't let you use
    |   |   | | 154156 [daryl brandy] Sorry, my misunderatanding.  I thought it had to do with the fact that
    |   |   | + 154161 [dblack wobbl] I'm a Rubyist, and I think it's a close call :-)  Admittedly, part of
    |   |   |   154166 [Ara.T.Howard] dispatch(a_message, *args, &block)
    |   |   |   154167 [dblack wobbl] My problem with this kind of name is that it isn't clear which one
    |   |   |   + 154168 [vjoel path.b] That's part of the reason for #respond (which I proposed along with
    |   |   |   + 154169 [transfire gm] What if #send was fixed and then add a method for "getting on the
    |   |   |   + 154180 [james_b neur] Quite true, and, whatever name is picked, I hope it has a fairly
    |   |   |   | 154183 [Ara.T.Howard] otoh it's __very__ useful to be able to do
    |   |   |   | + 154186 [james_b neur] www.rubydoc.org?
    |   |   |   | | 154190 [Ara.T.Howard] skinnier fingers help too (sheepishly) ;-)  thanks.
    |   |   |   | + 154191 [dblack wobbl] I agree (and the scanf manpage came in very handy during the codefest
    |   |   |   + 154181 [Ara.T.Howard] hmm.  true.  but that is true of send too - one must memorize that only public
    |   |   |     154189 [dblack wobbl] If send is redefined to be strictly a programmatic equivalent to the
    |   |   + 154178 [dooby d10.ka] Thanks for accepting that David was using your definition
    |   |   | 154476 [daniel brock] Sure it would --- #send! would immediately invoke the
    |   |   + 154179 [james_b neur] Is it not dangerous for client code to rely on calling the private
    |   + 154055 [james_b neur] Well, I'll start with another "I know you know this, but ..."
    + 154063 [calamitas ad] Something has been bothering me about this still, and now I know what.
      154068 [dblack wobbl] I tend to agree that private methods are not "missing".  I think that
      + 154072 [malte.milatz] In my opinion, an object shouldn't tell others about its internals unless
      | + 154075 [dblack wobbl] irb(main):003:0> 1.puts
      | | 154082 [calamitas ad] I agree that the error message is contradictory. At least that can be
      | + 154078 [calamitas ad] Well, I agree with the NoMethodError, but I wouldn't conclude that
      |   154089 [dblack wobbl] Yes -- really the confusion was in my restatements, not your usage.  I
      |   + 154095 [transfire gm] Looking at this I left to wonder, would it make sense to have a
      |   + 154098 [calamitas ad] Indeed, that was exactly the idea, that in resolving a method call, public
      |     154099 [dblack wobbl] As "Mr. send!" I just wanted to make sure I hadn't come across as
      + 154076 [calamitas ad] First off, I have to mention that I meant with[out] _explicit_ receiver,

^ Generating barcodes (as gif/jpg)
153674 [pelletierm e] I need to generate barcodes (in UPC and codabar symbologies) and

^ Circular dependecy on classes
153676 [anatol.pomoz] I have several classes that have circular dependencies on each other.
+ 153678 [shortcutter ] The easiest soltuion: Reopen class Solder after you defined class
+ 153679 [ruby.brian g] You could reopen the class. That works like predeclaration in other languages.
+ 153686 [derek derekw] I think you're simply using an instance variable where a method is
+ 153690 [shortcutter ] Knight has to be defined when it is used.
| + 153694 [dblack wobbl] class C
| + 153698 [derek derekw] David already mentioned this, but remember that when the method is
| + 153700 [shortcutter ] Ooops, I really ovelooked that one. Time to go home I guess.  Sorry
+ 153691 [dblack wobbl] s/der/dier/g :-)
+ 153692 [anatol.pomoz] Thanks for your quick answers.
  153693 [dblack wobbl] And it has the advantage of working :-)  What you've got above (even

^ symbols vs. strings
153677 [r.mark.volkm] I got the impression that when a method expects a Hash containing
+ 153682 [ruby.brian g] def pack(arghash)
| 153684 [r.mark.volkm] Just to clarify, are you saying that ...
| + 153697 [gavri.fernan] Rails makes use of
| + 153699 [ruby.brian g] Yes, that is two times true. Hashes do not special-case for strings or
+ 153683 [dblack wobbl] module SSHash

^ Status of Ruby.NET compiler
153687 [josh.charles] This may be posting to the wrong list, but someone here might know.
153696 [florgro gmai] I'm the run-time guy for that project and have been working primarily at
154059 [surrender_it] how would you do that?
154085 [florgro gmai] It's vague and not going into much detail, but

^ Fwd: [SOLUTION] Sodoku Solver (#43)
153688 [james graypr] charset=US-ASCII;

^ Looking for Debian complete package for 1.8
153689 [tesla.nicoli] In a backwards move I have gone from CentOS (fedora) to Xandros (debian)
+ 153701 [rasputnik gm] apt-get install rails
+ 153779 [ruby_talk sh] Debian vs. Ruby is a Tale of Woe of epic proportions.  My understanding
  153786 [ruby_talk sh] ...drop the "| wc -l".  That was for me to count the libraries for the
  153790 [simpleisbett] switch your sources to pull from TESTNG and then
  153795 [ruby_talk sh] Doesn't this mean that EVERY application you have on your system will be
  + 153797 [jim weirichh] Testing is somewhere between stable and unstable ... I've found it to be a
  + 153816 [rasputnik gm] You can cheat - just add the testing (a.k.a. etch) sources,
    153820 [ruby.brian g] Its gmail's fault. Seems like a regression to me.

^ [QUIZ] Word Chains (#44)
153695 [james graypr] 1.  Please do not post any solutions or spoiler discussion for this quiz until
+ 153704 [francois bag] does anyone have a working link for the wordlist.txt dictionary that
| 153706 [james graypr] Although I see I was lazy with the program used in the quiz and just
+ 153846 [dbatml gmx.d] If your program can find the shortest chain between two words, then
| 153849 [SimonKroeger] And another challenge, explain all the words your program emits..
| 153857 [dbatml gmx.d] Yes, I also wondered what some of those mean, but they are all in
+ 153883 [gavin refine] My fun extra credit (that I may or may not get to) is to find the
+ 154175 [ruby.brian g] Here comes my solution. It relies on the priority queue posted in
  + 154227 [p.capriotti ] Here is mine. Nothing special, except that I used Dijkstra algorithm
  + 154229 [ruby.brian g] - No longer outputs solution in reverse order

^ mod_ruby Setting Content-Type in rhtml files
153707 [rubytalk ben] Howdy!

^ to_s and to_str
153708 [r.mark.volkm] Here's what I've learned so far.
+ 153709 [shortcutter ] to_s is rather human readable while to_str should return a string
+ 153711 [derek derekw] implementation.
+ 153715 [james graypr] I think every time I've implemented to_str (rare for me) it just
  153737 [r.mark.volkm] Here's another example that shows cases when to_s and to_str are used.

^ vim user switch to emacs?
153722 [joevandyk gm] So, I've been a long-term vim user.  But I've heard about how emacs is
+ 153725 [railsinator ] I can't speak to the vimisms. Shell mode in emacs is really easy: M-x shell
| + 153726 [mike.douglas] The mode you are looking for is called Viper Mode.
| + 153728 [derek derekw] If this is the sort of thing you're looking for then I have an
| + 153729 [joevandyk gm] Thanks!  What about syntax highlighting and Ruby indentation?  (And
| | 153751 [mailing-list] Actually, a lot of things have been fixed in CVS.
| | + 153755 [halostatue g] On 8/26/05, Nikolai Weibull
| | | 153759 [mailing-list] Ah, what I meant was that the continuation lines don't line up with the
| | + 153756 [joevandyk gm] On 8/26/05, Nikolai Weibull
| |   153760 [mailing-list] Should be so, yes,
| + 153761 [cameron.math] did ':shell' not work for you?
|   + 153774 [halostatue g] That's different. That starts a shell in a new window, or shells out.
|   + 153776 [mailing-list] I hear good things about screen as well,
|   + 153782 [derek derekw] Dont' get me wrong, i love vim and it's the greatest editor in the
|   | 153796 [mailing-list] Well, that's really not Vim's fault.  If you don't like what :shell
|   + 153785 [lukfugl gmai] Under what conditions? I'll agree that :shell from inside a gvim
+ 154157 [ jupp gmx.de] Don't believe those false rumors. Yes, there is viper-mode but it is
  154279 [chneukirchen] Hmm, I'm curious.  Can you show me a sample task that made you switch
  + 154310 [derek derekw] I made the switch after being a 5 year Emacs die-hard.  There were
  + 154323 [    s xss.de] .... give and take a few \ in front of parentheses ...
  | 154446 [chneukirchen] C-x h M-x flush-lines \[CRON\] RET
  | + 154452 [logancapaldo] I'm not the OP, but probably the same way I do, ESC.
  | + 154467 [    s xss.de] vim lets you put any command after the global pattern. How does emacs solve this
  | | + 154483 [chneukirchen] That's not directly possible; you can, however, apply a keyboard macro
  | | | 154490 [daniel brock] Ironically, I think C-a for beginning-of-line is one of the
  | | | + 154495 [chneukirchen] Yeah, it makes sense but there is no direct english word.
  | | | | 154497 [dblack wobbl] Alpha and... end :-)
  | | | + 154682 [meta pobox.c] Q is the leftmost letter on *my* QWERTY keyboard.
  | | + 154484 [rhkramer gma] Top posting to say, if you're looking for (or to recommend) an editor and
  | + 154482 [derek derekw] life example)
  | + 154492 [daniel brock] It probably took Stefan even longer to think through what
  |   154501 [mailing-list] Blah, blah, blah.
  |   + 154505 [daniel brock] Nikolai,
  |   | 154509 [Daniel.Berge] Time to add a "vi/vim/gvim/emacs/xemacs" trash filter to the 'ol email client.
  |   + 154657 [mailing-list] 
  |     154661 [tsuraan gmai] You are now officially my hero.  I've been looking for this forever,
  + 154445 [chneukirchen] Same here.  I touch configuration files mainly with vim, and code with
threads.html
top