181536-240840 subjects 181912-366789
Commit emails for RubyForge Subversion projects
181695 [tom@in oe he] Commit emails are now available for folks with RubyForge projects that
181719 [tsumeruby@ts] Do you support CIA?
181737 [tom@in oe he] 006/02/commit_emails_a.h
Spacing issues when using Inferior-Ruby Emacs mode
181707 [joshstaiger@] I'm seeing some rather strange behavior when using Inferior-Ruby-Mode in
Re: Current Temperature (#68)
181709 [semmons99@gm] # Author: Shane Emmons
181708 [semmons99@gm] ** Sorry had my test code still in there for my location
181716 [james@gr yp ] I was just giving you a hard time, but that's so much for making the
Dynamic stuff and books
181710 [riko@de pa m] I started using ruby a couple of weeks ago and it's time to make a couple
181722 [rossrt@ro co] I'll skip to the bits I might be able to help with :)
181752 [riko@de pa m] It's the reason why i put the index. I supposed many people would have
181764 [rossrt@ro co] Answering a later question you had, the above singleton method could be
+ 181815 [riko@de pa m] Quite interesting. I understand its semantic, but not its syntax. That is
| 181828 [rossrt@ro co] 'class' here is doing what you expect it to do - defining a class. But
| + 181942 [logancapaldo] ...
| + 182006 [riko@de pa m] Ok. Quite got it. It's kind of a new viewpoint to me. In fact it can be
| + 182011 [rossrt@ro co] In terms of the implementation, it would seem so (thanks, Logan), and
| | 182117 [riko@de pa m] Ok. That's pretty much the same advise I give when someone asks me the same
| + 182120 [logancapaldo] ...
| 182142 [riko@de pa m] We were discussing about another syntax to reopen the class.
| 182153 [logancapaldo] ...
+ 181827 [riko@de pa m] Quite interesting. I understand its semantic, but not its syntax. That is
empty field ( check form )
181724 [michaelaugus] is there some function to check a form on empty fields or check the
Plugin type discovery/registration - How do I discover what classes were loaded when I dynamically require in ruby files from a directory?
181725 [jeff.barczew] ...
+ 181727 [james@gr yp ] Hope that helps.
| 181729 [gene.tani@gm] this is relevant too, I think
+ 181735 [vjoel@pa h. ] Kernel#module_eval is a good tool for wrapping up plug-ins inside a new
181750 [jeff.barczew] ...
Confused about "private"??
181743 [info@jo na e] I have a confusion in Ruby's way of dealing with "private" instance methods.
181744 [dblack@wo bl] Private methods cannot be called with an explicit receiver, and "self"
[SOLUTION] Current Temperature (#68)
181751 [email55555@g] require 'uri'
tar with ruby
181759 [tomas_fische] I have started using ruby.
181766 [drbrain@se m] I tend to favor calling external programs when I know they'll be there.
181775 [halostatue@g] ...whereas I tend to prefer a pure Ruby approach. I plan on improvingArchive::Tar::Minitar in the near future anyway and have been givensome partial support for symbolic links.
DRb and signals
181760 [mental@ry ia] Using DRb appears to disable signal handlers in Ruby, at least in
181767 [drbrain@se m] $ ruby -v -
181771 [vjoel@pa h. ] Seems ok also with ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [i686-linux].
181779 [logancapaldo] ...
181863 [mental@ry ia] Hmm, okay, thanks. I guess it's an HP-UX issue.
Is this Ruby warning making sense???
181761 [scriptfan@gm] Does anyone think if this the warning makes any sense?
+ 181762 [lopexx@au og] Any construction literal (true in this case) will produce such a warning
+ 181785 [rcoder@gm il] Writing 'if (foo = "bar")' instead of 'if (foo == "bar")' is a classic
+ 181810 [malteNOSPAM@] Yes, because you are testing an expression (a=true) though it's obvious in
[ANN] Ruby-VPI 0.1
181773 [skurapat@uc ] Ruby-VPI 0.1 has been released.
181774 [joevandyk@gm] Someone needs to make a "C++ for Ruby programmers" book. I'm getting
+ 181776 [tsumeruby@ts] Heres a patch
+ 181777 [ruby@an hr p] } Someone needs to make a "C++ for Ruby programmers" book. I'm getting
| + 181780 [nugend@gm il] Just include the Ruby extension binaries and write it using the Ruby C calls!
| + 181900 [joevandyk@gm] 1. Templates (that aren't in the STL) scare me.
| | + 181933 [none@no e. e] Does this help?
| | | 181936 [none@no e. e] (Insert about eight thousand lines of compilation
| | + 182032 [aderobertis@] #include <iostream>
| | | 182148 [logancapaldo] #include <iostream>
| | + 182049 [jeff@sc wa c] They shouldn't. Read C++ Templates by Vandevoorde & Josuttis, and
| + 181923 [ptkwt@ar cn ] Lots and lots of syntax....
+ 181781 [wilsonb@gm i] In addition to what the others mentioned, you can also write Ruby code
+ 181857 [doodpants@ma] As a professional software engineer, I've used a number of different
+ 181869 [gregory.t.br] As I've been painfully drudging through a C++ & OO Design course, I've
+ 181888 [jeff@sc wa c] I love the C++ programming language. I'm not going to compare it to
| 181903 [gregory.t.br] No MINASWAN to protect you over there? :-(
+ 181953 [agorilla@gm ] Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
Pine's book "Learning to Program" - Answer?
181787 [wood_yee12@h] "Write a program which asks for a person's favorite number. Have your
+ 181788 [mando.escami] ...
| 181790 [jeff@bl e- i] Also, I believe the line that that reads 'num'.to_i return zero as
| 181845 [wood_yee12@h] # Write a program which asks for a person's favorite number. Have your
| 181848 [dblack@wo bl] Gregor is using string interpolation, to insert the expression num + 1
+ 181789 [james@gr yp ] There's your problem line.
+ 181808 [gk@cu co y. ] puts "Whats your favourite number?"
+ 181851 [gk@cu co y. ] 1.) if you do a .to_i to num, you dont need to chomp it.
+ 181853 [dblack@wo bl] puts "What's you're favorite number?"
| 181856 [gk@cu co y. ] true ;)
+ 181861 [gk@cu co y. ] num = "1"
[ANN] Dallas Ruby Brigade meets March 7th
181791 [adam@th re l] The Dallas Ruby Brigade begins!
Drawing a hierarchy w.r.t. class (instance) variables
181795 [minkoo.seo@g] Recently, I've read
this feels ugly
181796 [wrong@so al ] i better explain a little to get started.
181798 [wrong@so al ] oops, wrong list. so sorry.
Documentation with rDoc and .chm-help.
181797 [email.to.sas] I hava a question about documentation with rDoc an the .chm-help
Stack level too deep
181800 [m-lists@br s] I have a tree that I do recursion over the nodes (and then some
+ 181802 [meinrad.rech] ...
+ 181805 [bob.news@gm ] The easiest change is to use BFS instead of DFS - if that's possible in
| 181811 [meinrad.rech] ...
| 181818 [bob.news@gm ] That's exactly the other recommendation I gave. :-)
| 181881 [m-lists@br s] I'm implementing the composite pattern using acts_as_tree and STI in
| 181929 [logancapaldo] ...
+ 181945 [ericrchr@gm ] You can change the stack size of the Ruby executable with editbin. It's
how to run a ruby program from another one
181801 [navyaamerine] ...
+ 181803 [billk@ct .c ] Usually
+ 181806 [bob.news@gm ] 1912: parent
Sending Binary Data?
181804 [ynadji@om ga] My friend and I are writing a chat/IM client in Ruby. It's nothing
+ 181807 [bob.news@gm ] - you use + for string concatenation which constantly creates new objects
+ 181948 [logancapaldo] ...
181812 [minkoo.seo@g] irb(main):001:0> class F < Struct.new :n
181814 [kiaroskuro@g] The following works for me. I suspect you should have used self
181816 [minkoo.seo@g] It works! Thank you.
181819 [kiaroskuro@g] The alternative would be to use @n, but I am not sure that Struct
+ 181820 [minkoo.seo@g] It is strange because
| + 181825 [rossrt@ro co] Well, n = 1 just assigns the fixnum 1 to a (new) local variable 'n'.
| | + 181826 [minkoo.seo@g] Sigh. This reminds me of the rule that I have to use
| | + 181829 [kiaroskuro@g] It's really unrubesque and tricky. What would be the consequences of
| | | 181834 [rossrt@ro co] This isn't necessarily based in fact (i.e. I've not surfed the source
| | | 181835 [kiaroskuro@g] I would disagree on the third point.
| | | 181920 [mark@mw ld n] One explanation I've heard for this behavior is that if 'self' was implied
| | + 181860 [mental@ry ia] It's really the only possible way; the variable-versus-writer
| | 181961 [rossrt@ro co] Hmm, yes now I think about it that makes sense. So in that case I guess
| + 181838 [news@wo co .] How should it be in your opinion?
| | 181854 [kiaroskuro@g] thanks for pointing out the side effects of the other stylistic
| | 181989 [news@wo co .] I'm not a regular programmer. So I guess I don't have a chance to discuss
| | + 182083 [mental@ry ia] When speaking of grammar, "ambiguity" refers to situations where the
| | + 182553 [kiaroskuro@g] The reason I find it surprising is that I expect to read from
| + 181859 [mental@ry ia] Check again. n=1 will parse as assignment to the local variable 'n'
| + 181901 [hal9000@hy e] Please explain what you mean.
+ 181858 [mental@ry ia] Since variables are declared via first assignment, how could it be
181862 [kiaroskuro@g] I guess that in principle when you see an '=', you could lookup a
+ 181864 [gwtmp01@ma .] The problem, of course, is that methods can come and go so you would
| 181868 [kiaroskuro@g] that wouldn't worry me. it's a rare event that tests would probably
| 181872 [mental@ry ia] It's not a matter of being defensive... because variables and method
| 181875 [kiaroskuro@g] What I meant is that a feature of this grammar forces us to use this
| 181880 [mental@ry ia] But do we really want a situation where the names of local variables
| + 181892 [pit@ca it in] 100% agreed.
| + 181949 [logancapaldo] ...
+ 181865 [mental@ry ia] In Ruby's grammar, expressions containing a name parse differently
181932 [matz@ru y- a] Yes, and in Ruby2.0, this will be changed to "if you see an assignment
+ 181966 [mental@ry ia] This is best for the user. However...
| 181977 [matz@ru y- a] I'm not sure what you meant by "ambiguities". The identifiers not
+ 181974 [minkoo.seo@g] This make sense, but
| 181979 [matz@ru y- a] def foobar(ary)
+ 182196 [vikkous@gm i] def foo
182227 [matz@ru y- a] Hmm, you make me remember a trick in the parser (which I made).
182312 [vikkous@gm i] I'm trying to understand the distinction... I think I see. It's
Formatting to "Thousands"
181813 [hscbaj@ho ma] A colleague of mine wishes to format a float to include commas at thousand
181837 [james@gr yp ] def commify( number )
+ 181878 [semmons99@gm] I have to say, that is some great Regex Fu. I was looking to do
+ 181889 [hscbaj@ho ma] Implemented this into the float class.
+ 181890 [jeff@sc wa c] That's nice, except that gsub! returns nil if no substitutions are
+ 181891 [james@gr yp ] Good catch. I originally had it in multiple lines and I forgot to
| 181954 [logancapaldo] I don't know why but using regexps to do this kind of scares me.
| 182050 [jeff@sc wa c] Try the Friedl book. It will open your eyes. :)
+ 181893 [kevin.olbric] Or you could just use 'gsub' instead of 'gsub!' and avoid the nil
Re: Python for Fortran programmers
181821 [claird@la rd] Please help me understand what you're writing here. I *think*
181925 [ptkwt@ar cn ] This is because Python was there earlier.
Iterators and Assigment
181830 [bl719293@bi ] Consider...
181833 [bob.news@gm ] Because Ruby does call by value where values are object references. Same
181944 [lists@tu ni ] def fred
182002 [bl719293@bi ] Thanks guys. Your responses have cleared this up. I was assumig some sort of
Bug in Racc?
181831 [j@Ti pe l. o] The following was reported to Minero Aoki (Racc developer) a while ago;
Same variable name used in block and local question
181839 [scriptfan@gm] Can anybody help me here, TIA!!
+ 181842 [bob.news@gm ] No, it isn't because it was defined outside the block. It's used in cases
| 181847 [dblack@wo bl] I think that's a different thing, though, from the parameter
| 181873 [bob.news@gm ] Is there a difference with regard to scope between
| 181882 [dblack@wo bl] I guess I had the impression that what puzzled the OP was that using a
+ 181844 [dblack@wo bl] Block parameters actually use assignment semantics, so if a variable
Bug in Ripper
181840 [j@Ti pe l. o] Minero Aoki has confirmed that the following is a bug. I'm not (yet!)
Wherefore art thou RedCloth 3.1?
181846 [Bil.Kleb@NA ] Have the PDF output plans been tabled?
181871 [gregory.t.br] Whoa! If Redcloth gets these things, it'll make Ruport's life a lot easier!
182190 [ news@ja .f ] Don't get too excited - I was all atwitter too until I realized that that
Using assert() in a loop
181849 [t.catlin@el ] I hope this question isn't answered somewhere else, but the search was
181874 [bob.news@gm ] Well, the test fails as soon as a single URL fails. That's the reason for
181946 [t.catlin@el ] As with many of these problems, hours of head banging are solved with a
OCI8 driver date "out of range"
181877 [crdiaz324@gm] I am building an applications that access an existing database that
+ 181947 [drbrain@se m] Either
+ 181950 [crdiaz324@gm] Ok, after doing some research on this, it looks like the problem isn't
| 182027 [rurounijones] I am using a simple simple program that suffers from this problem. I
+ 182031 [kubo@ji ba .] Did you use OraDate#to_time?
Visual debuggers for Ruby
181879 [ayZIG0106@qa] I normally use DDD for debugging my C/C++ code, and know it can debug Perl
+ 181894 [edder@tk sp ] No problem
+ 181898 [meinrad.rech] ...
+ 181902 [collinsj@se ] There have been several posts lately about a new graphical debugger for
| 181998 [ayZIG0106@qa] Many thanks all!
+ 181922 [james.herdma] Have you tried this? http://mr-guid.rubyforge.org/
182017 [rurounijones] Just looking at this quickly, can it be used to debug a Ruby on Rails
182043 [mtrier@gm il] Also, look into arachnoruby
182079 [ml.chibbs@gm] I can second this -- its probably the best graphical debugger
Rails on the Mac - Apple Article
181883 [jim@fr ez .o] ...
[ANN] rcov 0.2.0 - code coverage tool for Ruby
181885 [ mfp@ac .o g] Source code, additional information, screenshots... available at
+ 181896 [robert.feldt] Thanks Mauricio, this looks great and arrives just at the right momen
+ 181899 [neoneye@gm i] very nice :-)
+ 181904 [shanko_date@] ...
| 181963 [shanko_date@] ...
| 181965 [shanko_date@] ...
| + 181967 [mulperi@cc h] It seems like you are using the old rcov eg. rcov 0.1 instead of 0.2
| + 182339 [ mfp@ac .o g] I think I might be to blame for that; I didn't really think about
+ 181930 [meinrad.rech] ...
+ 184007 [ruby-talk@ba] Fabulous!
184100 [ mfp@ac .o g] It will be possible in the next release; in the meantime, could you use the
184116 [ruby-talk@ba] I am doing, and it looks good.
184488 [phurley@gm i] Just want to join the chorus of thank you. This is perfect. I found a
+ 184495 [ mfp@ac .o g] [rcov.rake]
| 184498 [pat.eyler@gm] Please do! I've got a much uglier/less comprehensive set of Rake
+ 184583 [chneukirchen] Wouldn't it be better if you used rake's "ruby" method instead of "sh"
191730 [rusty@ge dm ] I think I've gone a step further by integrating Rcov using Rake's
193308 [ mfp@ac .o g] I took your idea (looking into Rake::TestTask) to implement a Rcov::RcovTask
Cannot instal gettext 1.2.0 gem
181895 [byrnejb@ha t] OS = CentOS4.2
Teaching Ruby to COBOL programmers
181897 [wilsonb@gm i] This isn't a troll, I promise. I'm actually going to be doing this tomorrow.
+ 181955 [xeno@es im .] I like the idea that to a great extent what you are trying to do in a
+ 181956 [agorilla@gm ] Forgetting OOP for a moment, and thinking WWW instead...
| 181969 [steve@wa ts ] I agree.. important to teach.
| + 181970 [hal9000@hy e] All true enough.
| | + 181990 [google@er kv] LOL :)
| | + 182005 [chneukirchen] Finally, tell them that Rails 1.1 new Object#copy_instance_variables_from
| | + 182022 [wilsonb@gm i] Thanks Hal (and everyone).. this kind of thing definitely helps. Part
| | 182202 [bill.walton@] Were it me, with all the obstacles you've outlined, I'd feel successful
| + 182442 [corey.ssf.la] Also, remember that they're very used to thinking in procedural terms.
+ 181968 [dave@bu t. d] .... and methods belong to objects' classes. I'd be emphasizing OO. To me,
+ 181976 [vjoel@pa h. ] We hear that a lot, but, somehow, it never sounds right. If variables
| + 182161 [gwtmp01@ma .] Well, not everyone conceptualizes numbers, booleans and symbols as
| | 182418 [malteNOSPAM@] If x looks like a reference to an object, if it walks like a reference to
| + 182185 [hal9000@hy e] I'd say that they're not "labels" in that sense, but in the sense of
+ 182132 [anibalrojas@] I'll focus it as a introduction to Object Oriented Programming with
+ 182209 [none@no e. e] Against common conception, only about 40% of mainframe programmers
+ 182224 [jlsysinc@al ] MFer here.
+ 182319 [adam.shelly@] So how did it go?
182514 [wilsonb@gm i] It went better than I'd feared, really. I'd like to thank everyone