198810-202106

198654-227029 subjects 199076-383884

ERROR NoMethodError
198810 [arunkumar.bh] I'm trying to configure my ragi but its giving me a really hard time can

concatenate hash
198813 [cdc@cy he s.] Is there a built-in method to concatenate 2 hashes?  Couldn't find anything on
198814 [erikveen@dd ] There's no such thing as concatenating hashes. But Hash#merge
198824 [cdc@cy he s.] Thank you.  That's just what was looking for.
198952 [shortcutter@] There's also update.  Depends on what you need.

Re: Welcome to our (ruby-talk ML)         You are added automatically
198817 [logesh@ia ri] help

[ANN] Mongrel 0.3.13.2 Pre-Release -- RailsConf
198827 [zedshaw@ze s] Hey Folks,
198828 [zedshaw@ze s] gem install mongrel --source=http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/releases/

string =~ string
198830 [alex@bl ck e] "cat o' 9 tails" =~ '\d'   #=> nil
+ 198839 [TimHunter@nc] irb(main):004:0> "cat o' 9 tails" =~ /\d/
| 198840 [alex@bl ck e] That's not the point.  Why is what I'm seeing different to what's in the
+ 198841 [logancapaldo] String#=~ used to automagically convert the second arg into a regexp.
  + 198842 [alex@bl ck e] Ah, ok.  That makes sense.  Why was it changed?
  + 199065 [shugotenshi@] I'd really like similar behavior to be added back in. For example,

Ruby flaws , follow up to Ruby goodies
198834 [roger.johans] Ok Ive got a fair picture of whats good about Ruby.
+ 198837 [james.herdma] ...
+ 198843 [zoso@fo on e] Although they are no big deal for me, three of the most common Ruby
+ 198857 [buppcpp@ya o] Here are some of the things that matz (the creator of Ruby) dislikes
+ 198862 [snacktime@gm] Lack of available modules for certain things, such as kerberos..
  + 198870 [wilsonb@gm i] Someone here at RailsConf was saying that he had built a C extension
  + 198924 [garbagecat10] ...
    199008 [snacktime@gm] We need pretty much full functionality.  We run a couple of KDC's and

[Quiz 84 - Pascal]
198844 [benjohn@fy h] #!/usr/bin/ruby
198846 [erikveen@dd ] $ irb

[Quiz 84 - Pascal] !Don't read my last post! Sorry!
198845 [benjohn@fy h] Sorry - I thought it was Sunday!

Why is there no Smalltalk-like IDE for Ruby?
198847 [joe.moore@gm] I posted this to comp.lang.ruby and comp.lang.smalltalk, and my blog.
+ 198864 [jsunn@mt .n ] Yeah, something like that. Or vim7, the vim-ruby project files, gnu
+ 198866 [listbox@ju i] - the ability to inspect the code of any part of the program
  198879 [daniel@fl in] Komodo has a good class/method browser
  198880 [rosejn@gm il] I agree.  People who say they don't want code completion or refactoring
  198923 [mailinglists] Well this is your opinion.

What do we want to add to RubyForge (was: RubyForge in Ruby?)
198858 [pollak@gm il] ...
+ 198863 [transfire@gm] Darcs support.
| 199349 [mental@ry ia] git also.
| 199560 [hramrach@ce ] +1
| 199708 [chneukirchen] Providing the git server probably won't be easy in on a server with
+ 198865 [znmeb@ce ma ] I guess I'll take a look at RubyForge, list all the things I'm *not*
+ 199428 [jgbailey@gm ] ...

Re: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84) Solution
198867 [heron@jp .n ] #! /usr/bin/env ruby

Help with "generating" code
198871 [merc@mo il .] OK, this is a Ruby question, even though it's for a RoR project :-D
+ 198900 [pollak@gm il] ...
+ 198920 [toalett@gm i] class Parent
  199010 [merc@mo il .] ***THANK YOU***

Weird Net::HTTP error
198872 [bjohnson@me ] You can copy and paste this in irb, but...this is a really strange
+ 198873 [bjohnson@me ] Also, if you add
+ 198874 [james.britt@] *Exact* same OS and configuration on both machines? Exact same Ruby
  + 198876 [steviedizzle] Yeah, if anything it is an issue on your server as I can execute the code fine and I am in Boston.
  + 198877 [bjohnson@me ] curl --url www.ticketmaster.com doesn't work either. So I guess the IP

Debian packaging policy
198887 [transfire@gm] Looking over the Debian Ruby Policy.  If you're interested, a good
198888 [rasputnik@gm] In my experience, what ruby users want doesn't cut much ice with
198921 [mgreenly@gm ] I don't really buy into that much.  The ruby packagers are also ruby
+ 198927 [transfire@gm] That's exactly my point --the use of /usr/ and /usr/local/ shoud be
| 199021 [sanxiyn@gm i] People on http://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/. Mail them.
| 199023 [transfire@gm] Nice. Thank You.
+ 198971 [chneukirchen] Exactly the same here, except that that's more or less grown
+ 199013 [jmg3000@gm i] Yup.
+ 199724 [strobel@se u] Debian users who use aptitude to install ruby opt to let Debian handle
  199725 [transfire@gm] Maybe I am misunderstood. Its not that it doesn't function. Rather that
  199851 [strobel@se u] Who says that? Certainly not the FHS. On the contrary, the FHS is very
  199854 [transfire@gm] "fixed file system layout"? Ha! The whole FHS is a fixed file system
  199881 [strobel@se u] share/ is for architecture independant files, lib/ is for architecture

[ruby] win32-etc
198890 [rdusong@gm i] ...
198982 [rdusong@gm i] ...

segmentation fault in PDF::Writer
198891 [soso_pub@ya ] While using PDF::Writer I encountered a segmentation
198966 [halostatue@g] I need more information. There's nothing in PDF::Writer that will

Stumped:beginners question
198892 [sambient@gm ] I'm having a hard time with both getting my branching correct as well
+ 198894 [Rob@Ag le on] if (reply != 'yes' && reply != 'no')
| + 198896 [sambient@gm ] if (reply != 'yes' && reply != 'no')
| + 198897 [M.B.Smillie@] There's trouble with your loop condition as well: you'd want to
|   198917 [sambient@gm ] If I'm assimilating this correctly then if something is not equating
|   198931 [M.B.Smillie@] Basically, only 'nil' and 'false' are false in boolean expressions,
+ 198895 [matthew.moss] This is a problem.  No matter what answer you provide, at least one of
+ 198997 [pete@no ah t] I'm just going to rewrite this, because there are a bunch of bad
| 198998 [cdc@cy he s.] def ask(question)
| 199000 [dblack@wo bl] while (reply != "yes") && (reply != "no")
| 199108 [sambient@gm ] Well, now the author has introduced us to the wonderful world of
+ 199138 [sambient@gm ] Alright, if there are any people remaining that have some patience to
  199143 [Rob@Ag le on] OK, first I just *have* to ask:  Do you have a copy of Programming Ruby?
  199147 [sambient@gm ] This is the while explanation (most of it) from PR 2nd edition , which I own.
  199149 [M.B.Smillie@] Your biggest problem in the code you put up is that you're using the
  199153 [sambient@gm ] Ok a 30w light bulb went off so now I see that I've changed the value
  199154 [sambient@gm ] Sorry, meant to put this in the last reply.  One thing I noticed is
  199160 [M.B.Smillie@] Are you calling the method?  Or just defining it?  This defines a
  199184 [sambient@gm ] I finally have had more success, at least for the first part of the
  199245 [robert.dober] ...

[QUIZ][SOLUTION] pp Pascal (#84)
198898 [myilmaz@gm .] # Pascal's Triangle (Ruby Quiz #84)

implementation of mixins?
198901 [roger.johans] How are the mixins implemented in Ruby?
+ 198903 [listbox@ju i] The mixin works with the methods and instance variables available on
+ 198908 [transfire@gm] You say "true" like non-"redirectrion" is a bad thing. Actually it is a
  198916 [roger.johans] Ah ok,
  198984 [listbox@ju i] Yes, self refers to the subject. Unless you are talking about the own

[ANN] Mongrel 0.3.13.2 -- RailsConf 2006 Release
198905 [zedshaw@ze s] Another release going out based on the very limited work done at

Fwd: Please Forward: Ruby Quiz Submission
198910 [james@gr yp ] ...

Fwd: Please Forward: Ruby Quiz Submission
198911 [james@gr yp ] ...

Fwd: Please Forward: Ruby Quiz Submission
198912 [james@gr yp ] ...

Fwd: Please Forward: Ruby Quiz Submission
198913 [james@gr yp ] ...

Fwd: Please Forward: Ruby Quiz Submission #84
198914 [james@gr yp ] ...

Solution: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84)
198925 [home@ke ry u] Having followed the discussion of this quiz, I suspect this is going
198996 [pete@no ah t] Solution: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84)

Re: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84) - solution
198929 [skurapat@uc ] ...

Re: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84) Solution (kind of)
198930 [dbatml@gm .d] of course I have a solution that solves the original problem, but there

array indices
198932 [sambient@gm ] Is there a way to set the indice on an array,
+ 198933 [M.B.Smillie@] Check the docs for the Array class.  I know there's a method which
+ 198935 [M.B.Smillie@] Negate that last answer - I misunderstood.  Sorry.
+ 198950 [ara.t.howard] # gem install arrayfields

m17n and unicode
198934 [rtilley@vt e] Please forgive my ignorance.
198946 [logancapaldo] Unicode says, lets make ONE universal character set and map all our

[QUIZ][SOLUTION] pp Pascal (#84)
198936 [rretzbach@go] ...
+ 198944 [ jupp@gm .d ] [QUIZ][SOLUTION] pp Pascal (#84)
+ 198986 [mvette13@gm ] ...

RAspect - alpha demo
198940 [roger.johans] Ok, Ive just published an alpha release of my AOP framework RAspect

expecting kEND
198942 [sambient@gm ] I know this is a literal translation to keyword end, but unsure
198955 [mvette13@gm ] ...
199101 [GENIE@pr di ] Also your else should be elsif, assuming you only want that piece of

Re: [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84) [SOLUTION]
198943 [erikveen@dd ] ...
+ 198954 [eric.duminil] I do like your solution, though I didn't know lambda nor zip before.
+ 198981 [martin@sn wp] Actually, you can save two characters by a simple variation on the
| + 198991 [erikveen@dd ] row    = [1, 4, 6, 4, 1]
| | 199015 [martin@sn wp] row    = [1, 4, 6, 4, 1]
| | 199042 [erikveen@dd ] Sorry...
| + 199011 [skurapat@uc ] Same here. So far I have seen only two solutions, including mine,
|   199019 [martin@sn wp] #!ruby
|   199126 [martin@sn wp] And because I felt like tweaking it a bit more, here's a variation
+ 199027 [pete@no ah t] row                                      ===> [1, 3, 3, 1]
+ 199142 [pbattley@gm ] #!/usr/bin/env ruby

Odd << behaviour
198947 [ruby@ev nf o] class Stuff
198951 [ryantmulliga] The discrepancy here bothers me, because all of the Ruby tutorials I
198958 [mvette13@gm ] ...
198960 [ryantmulliga] Right.
198963 [toalett@gm i] It's syntactic sugar. You can't expect it to work with arbitrary
198965 [ryantmulliga] My complaint lies more in the fact that most ruby documentation I have
198968 [toalett@gm i] That's because operator overriding isn't an extension of the
+ 198970 [ruby@ev nf o] I agree with that. The documentation should note that << only overloads
| 198985 [jtregunna@bl] Why would you want it to warn you when you're defining it? You assume
| 199030 [ruby@ev nf o] In the case above, I cannot use the method in any way. Not with one and
+ 199012 [ryantmulliga] Why can't the semantics be extended to cover operators having variable

[SOLUTION] [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84)
198949 [SimonKroeger] Two solutions from me (you may choose if like at least one :))
+ 198959 [boris.prinz@] [SOLUTION] [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84)
| 199155 [james@gr yp ] => true
+ 198967 [erikveen@dd ] r).rstrip}}
  + 198974 [SimonKroeger] better?
  | + 198989 [erikveen@dd ] It's getting better, yes... ;]
  | | 199031 [alexandru@gl] [SOLUTION] [QUIZ] pp Pascal (#84)
  | + 199124 [erikveen@dd ] If we're thinking Lispy, well, why don't we stay in that
  + 198975 [rubytalk@ea ] ...

Advice Joining added to Cut-based AOP
198962 [transfire@gm] After some recent conversion on AOP on the list, I reviewing the
198977 [roger.johans] I would argue that is a bit more problematic than just applying the
198983 [transfire@gm] AOP is not just interception, I agree with you. And the whole of the

help please: math or variable problem
198969 [sambient@gm ] ...
+ 198972 [headspin@gm ] No. It should return XLVI [10 to 50, 5, 1].
| 198973 [sambient@gm ] ...
| 198976 [Ola.Bini@ki ] Take a lock at Ruby Quiz #22 for a bunch of solutions to this problem.
| 198978 [sambient@gm ] ...
+ 199048 [alex@bl ck e] rnm = rnm - (v * vrnm)

[SOLUTION] #84 Pascal Triangle
198994 [hawkman.gelo] ...

Question: Counting integers
198999 [sambient@gm ] ...
+ 199001 [sitharus@si ] x.to_s.length will do it
+ 199002 [TimHunter@nc] irb(main):001:0> x = 100
  + 199032 [shortcutter@] Be careful though if x can be something diffrent from a non negative integer.
  + 199056 [phasis68@ho ] irb(main):001:0> x = 100
    199130 [Rob@Ag le on] irb(main):003:0> x=0

Re: string =~ string
199004 [botp@de mo t] # > String#=~ used to automagically convert the second arg into
199045 [alex@bl ck e] Right.  Where do core doc-patches go?
199104 [jmg3000@gm i] ruby-core I believe. The ruby-doc ML seems to be more for discussion

Re: pp Pascal (#84)
199020 [sam.s.kong@g] Here's my solution.

<< for Hash?
199022 [simon.baird@] ...
+ 199041 [m.fellinger@] {:foo,1}.merge! :bar => 2
| 199064 [shugotenshi@] I like Michael's solution.
| 199191 [simon.baird@] ...
| + 199198 [danielbaird@] ...
| + 199237 [SimonKroeger] class Hash
+ 199061 [shortcutter@] The reason is probably that your << appends a complete collection (a
+ 199225 [roger.johans] but this screws up the scemantics
  199636 [vjoel@pa h. ] irb(main):001:0> s = Set[1,2,3]
  199637 [dstrelau@gm ] ...
  + 199639 [lukfugl@gm i] I disagree. Mathematically, a essentially hash is just a set of key,
  | 199646 [dstrelau@gm ] ...
  | 199648 [lukfugl@gm i] require 'set'
  + 199644 [ara.t.howard] imho both appending to set and appending to hash make equal sense/nonsense as
    199659 [vjoel@pa h. ] But those aren't other uses of the << operator. Those are "just" syntax.
    199660 [ara.t.howard] hmmm.  you are right in two of three.  but Fixnum#<< is definitely a method.
    199779 [guslist@fr e] Can't we see shifting an Integer the same as appending zeroes on one

SOAP (NDFD weather web service) question
199044 [ingoweiss@gm] Did by any chance anybody get the NDFD weather web service
+ 199161 [harmenschut@] I did not, but I think maybe you should call add_method with 5
+ 202106 [nakahiro@sa ] Why don't you try NDFD sample client in soap4r distribution?  It seems

Some ugly code (again)
199054 [mpepito13@gm] I have (again) some ruby code to beautifulize :-)
+ 199055 [mpepito13@gm] Oups!
| 199059 [botp@de mo t] #
+ 199060 [phasis68@ho ] If you want something one liner,
| 199062 [mpepito13@gm] Beuh it's remained me Perl :-)
| 199063 [SimonKroeger] puts (0...x*y).map{|i| "#{name}#{i%x+1}#{i/x+1}"}
+ 199066 [daniel.schie] (1..x).map{|x| (1..y).map{|y| "rack#{x}#{y}"}}.flatten
+ 199120 [GENIE@pr di ] The cartesian_product method doesn't exist, you would have to write it.
  199234 [mpepito13@gm] thank you all for your response but I cannot find what I want

creating graphical application with video
199058 [geert.fannes] I have to teach my sister how to create an application that can show pictures
+ 199089 [ilmari.heikk] SDL can show images and videos but is not really a gui toolkit.
| 199228 [Geert.Fannes] ...
+ 199093 [lymans@gm il] It's not Ruby, but Flex ( http://labs.adobe.com/flexproductline )

Ruby and Java equality usage
199067 [the.mindstor] I have posted a quick (reminder like) entry about how equality is
+ 199068 [robert.dober] ...
| + 199069 [the.mindstor] Thanks Robert. I have used that information and I am even linking to
| | + 199071 [robert.dober] ...
| | | 199072 [the.mindstor] Thanks for confirming my point :-). I couldn't find a
| | | 199078 [robert.dober] ...
| | | 199080 [the.mindstor] Sorry for this... pls blame me :-). I assume it is a feature, but till
| | + 199083 [M.B.Smillie@] I'll give you an actual use-case from my current work in natural
| + 199095 [shortcutter@] I don't fully agree to your point.  Basically == and eql? are meant to
|   + 199112 [Stephen.L.Mo] values,
|   | 199121 [the.mindstor] Oops... it looks like I've touched a nice one :-) (but somehow I am
|   + 199122 [robert.dober] ...
|   + 199125 [robert.dober] ...
|     199135 [shortcutter@] Pretty sure.
|     199139 [curi@cu i. s] Perhaps the issue is not so much having more than one, but having
|     + 199144 [the.mindstor] Hmmm... for me it is not the name problem, but (hopefully nobody will
|     + 199164 [shortcutter@] Yuck, basically one default equivalence relation is enough.
+ 199175 [drbrain@se m] #eql? is used to resolve key collisions in hashes.
  199199 [the.mindstor] ... and still wondering how is this answering my question (however
  + 199230 [drbrain@se m] ^^^ This line is the important one.  I feel it describes adequately
  | 199239 [the.mindstor] The problem I was facing was to explain why == and eql? are both
  + 199241 [robert.dober] ...
    199244 [the.mindstor] Rober, thanks and thanks. I think you are right. I am a little sad
    + 199246 [robert.dober] ...
    | 199254 [shortcutter@] <snip/>
    | 199270 [robert.dober] ...
    + 199250 [alex@bl ck e] Just to weigh in here on how I think of it, without this necessarily
    | 199252 [the.mindstor] Thanks Alex. This part of explanation is quite good. Continuing on the
    + 199285 [lukfugl@gm i] While this a fairly good and useful statement, I would reword it just
      199286 [lukfugl@gm i] The one question I do have regarding this is why isn't the default
      + 199287 [ara.t.howard] but alias take a copy of the aliased method - so you'd still need to re-alias
      + 199288 [decoux@mo lo] becuase this will change nothing
        199290 [lukfugl@gm i] <snip alias example>
        199291 [Stephen.L.Mo] Hashes values don't have to be unique.  Two distinct values may return
        199297 [lukfugl@gm i] Ah, gotcha. Thanks for the refresher. :) Is it true then that
        + 199299 [the.mindstor] I don't know if this is quite accurate. In Java world at least such an
        | 199308 [lukfugl@gm i] Hmm, I'm not sure I follow. The implementation in Ruby is similar.
        | 199309 [Stephen.L.Mo] Yes.  But not necessarily the vice versa.  If a.eql?(b) is true, then
        | + 199318 [lukfugl@gm i] I understand the "not vice versa" (that's why I used "only if" in the
        | + 199323 [gwtmp01@ma .] a.equal?(b) 	# identity: do a and b reference the same object?
        + 199326 [logancapaldo] I wonder if this has anything to do with
threads.html
top