33851-36062

33649-34968 subjects 34034-35129

Ruby and .NET
33851 [ps@ra ia .m ] I have been reading a bit about .NET for the last couple of days and must say
+ 33852 [stephan.schm] a Ruby.NET compiler would not be easily possible, for further
| 33853 [ps@ra ia .m ] what features of the ruby language would be hard or impossible to implement?
| 33860 [stephan.schm] Perhaps the people from the jRuby project could elaborate this. But
| + 33861 [erik@ba fo s] in the first place.
| | 33865 [peter@se an ] The Java bytecode has a published spec, .NET bytecode has been largely
| | + 33869 [elanthis@aw ] Last I checked it was an ECMA standard... or is the bytecode not part of
| | + 33871 [erik@ba fo s] That's funny considering that mono is working with the published specs
| | | + 33876 [stephan.schm] Which is senseless. .NET has some value as a standard if you can port
| | | + 33888 [peter@se an ] Hmmm. Was that anything like the published COM specs?
| | + 33895 [david.simmon] Like many misleading statements in the JavaLobby article
| | | 33896 [paul@pr sc d] Can you summarize?
| | | 33914 [david.simmon] can
| | + 33919 [james@ru yx ] C# and the CLR have been submitted to ECMA; Java is controlled entirely by Sun,
| | | 33921 [stephan.schm] Yes, and Microsoft is ultimately interested in slaving the world to
| | + 33922 [stephan.schm] Yes the same has been said (IP) about .NET, and MS admits that patents
| + 33873 [elanthis@aw ] Ya, that's why a Ruby interpreter could never be developed in a language
|   + 33878 [stephan.schm] I said "very good". Have you read the CLR article ?
|   | 33884 [elanthis@aw ] I've read up quite a bit on .NET, yes.  I am *really* looking forward to
|   | 33987 [ser@ge ma e-] Ugh.  No thanks.  We get Microsoft .NET on Linux, we'll get Microsoft-style
|   | 34014 [elanthis@aw ] Security is all based on the implementation... Mono *is* Open Source, so
|   | 34086 [ser@ge ma e-] Yes, this is true to some extent.  You /can/ build a certain amount of
|   | 34090 [elanthis@aw ] Thus, hopefully, an Open implementation will be among the best.  ^,^
|   | + 34091 [alwagner@tc ] I understand it perfectly well.  But then, I also pay attention to the news.
|   | + 34098 [ser@ge ma e-] Absolutely.  I guess we only differ in opinion about what the value of that
|   | | + 34100 [elanthis@aw ] Aye, suppose so.  ^,^
|   | | | + 34124 [ser@ge ma e-] It is long since time this thread went private.  The references to Ruby as
|   | | | + 34147 [alwagner@ua ] In the cases where Microsoft *did*
|   | | | | 34160 [elanthis@aw ] The 3.x/4.x versions of browsers, IE had a clear advantage, which is
|   | | | | 34166 [alwagner@ua ] This is a distinction that escapes me. I suppose we are back to
|   | | | + 34982 [d97masa@sp m] Eiffel#: Multiple Inhertance and Assertions dropped, both major semantic
|   | | + 34175 [tobiasreif@p] That's spoofing/forgery.
|   | + 34167 [tobiasreif@p] Ruby is strong. The language as such doesn't have change for any M$
|   |   34168 [elanthis@aw ] Well, face it - if Microsoft OS's become *totally* dependent on .NET
|   |   + 34174 [tobiasreif@p] What do you propose? Ruby is not dependent on M$, and thus doesn't have
|   |   | 36062 [web2ed@ya oo] Couldn't Ruby be implemented in C#, this would allow Ruby to hook into
|   |   + 34176 [rich@in oe h] Well...a point of clarification is in order.  Microsoft is developing
|   |     + 34178 [alwagner@ua ] This makes perfectly good sense to me. (Plus VB is really getting
|   |     + 34198 [benoit.cerri] and
|   |       34204 [rich@in oe h] Um...for as many apps that are written to use COM and OLE, there a many,
|   |       34234 [benoit.cerri] well I never said everything is COM but I do think that COM/OLE has had
|   + 33882 [nobu.nokada@] Ruby values have type, and variables are typeless.  They
|   + 33972 [benoit.cerri] The point is not to have a Ruby interpreter in .NET but to have a ruby
+ 33855 [mjais@we .d ] I do not know anything about .NET (maybe this will change wit Mono for
+ 33857 [jfontan@ce g] And Ruby to java bytecode compiler? I don't know much about Java bytecode and
| 33862 [jfontan@ce g] Opps, I thought that JRuby was only a ruby interpreter written in Java, I've
| 33863 [tobiasreif@p] I thought so too. It isn't?
| + 33864 [jfontan@ce g] JRuby is the effort to recreate the Ruby interpreter in Java and to create a
| | 33910 [jpetersen@un] We just started to implement a Ruby-to-Java compiler.
| + 33870 [stephan.schm] Sorry, the difference between a Ruby interpreter in Java and a Java byte
| | + 33874 [elanthis@aw ] As far as which parts of .NET are open, remember there are really two
| | | 33879 [stephan.schm] No, I think you are wrong. According to your methology, there are three
| | | 33883 [elanthis@aw ] Neither are all Ruby libraries open source, last I checked.  ^,^  And
| | + 33877 [tobiasreif@p] Neither of both technologies is open enough for me; personally.
| |   33880 [stephan.schm] Yip, but I have to earn some money with the skills I have and although I
| + 33911 [jpetersen@un] The Ruby-to-Java compiler is not ready yet.
| + 33973 [benoit.cerri] It is.
+ 33931 [alwagner@ua ] Regardless of the perceived benefits of something like .NET, and

ruby-m17n
33854 [alex_oscol@y] Have a nice day|night !
33872 [matz@ru y- a] A character, which can be part of words, and which is not an alphabet

Bitwise operators ability to coerce
33856 [jbshaldane@h] This discussion continued from RubyGarden on request of matz...

File.open weirdness
33885 [craig_files@] I need some help figuring out why the following ruby code does not work.
+ 33886 [decoux@mo lo] The syntax is File::open(filename, mode = "r", permission = 0666)
+ 33887 [dblack@ca dl] Put the permissions after the mode :-)
  33901 [cfiles@co co] Thanks, this is contrary to the information in the "Programming Ruby"
  + 33902 [Dave@Pr gm t] Sorry again.
  + 33903 [Ephaeton@gm ] you have umask 013 set ? || check your umask ?

building ruby
33899 [probertm@no ] I am attempting to build Ruby 1.6.6 on an HP-UX box and
33900 [gotoken@no w] Though I don't know why that happens, try
33904 [probertm@no ] Thank you for the tip.
33908 [gotoken@no w] I'm sorry missing your point in previous my message.  `Setup' file
+ 33912 [probertm@no ] Thank you very much -- that worked like a charm.
+ 33918 [nobu.nokada@] To suppress to compile dynamic loaded modules, uncomment the

[ANN] RubyStudio v. 0.1.1
33907 [gehlker@fa t] This is a minor upgrade to RubyStudio, the MacOSX Ruby IDE in progress.

Keyword arguments (Was: File.open weirdness)
33915 [Martin.Man@s] sorry to bother you once again with keyword arguments, but previous
+ 33917 [avi@be a4 co] I can see you do more Obj-C than Smalltalk - in Smalltalk, [] creates
| 33928 [Martin.Man@s] ntax
+ 33940 [paul@at es .] The problem with the latter proposal is that it would either be
| + 33942 [Dave@Pr gm t] It's OK for whitespace to be significant. For example, xx? is a method
| + 33983 [Martin.Man@s] I think you just successfully described something that guys @ apache.org ca=
+ 34011 [alwagner@tc ] Well, let's face the truth:  smalltalk syntax is STILL the most elegant

SWIG/Ruby woes with g++ 3.0
33923 [ballabio@ma ] Greetings,
+ 33930 [LJohnson@re ] This has been fixed in the CVS version of SWIG (and presumably will show up
+ 33938 [paul@at es .] What is 2.95.4?  The latest 2.95 version listed on gcc.gnu.org is
  33969 [ballabio@ma ] Oh, really? Well, that's what 'g++ -version' returned on my box.
  33976 [paul@at es .] %{
  33977 [ljohnson@re ] Just to follow up: this problem has been resolved (again ;) in the CVS

OT Netscape 4.x? was Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner
33932 [gehlker@fa t] On 2/15/02 5:54 AM, "yet another bill smith" <bigbill.smith@verizon.net>
+ 33933 [dempsejn@ge ] i just don't understand why it didn't show up! dhtml/javascript, ok, but a
| 33937 [gehlker@fa t] I can't understand that either. This discussion prompted me to look at
+ 33936 [jonas@rf 19 ] <OT>
| 33941 [gehlker@fa t] Thanks for replying. The sense of my question was: "If you like Netscape,
+ 33947 [bigbill.smit] Some of each, at least for me. Technically, Netwcape 6.x doesn't do some
| 33949 [gehlker@fa t] On 2/15/02 10:06 AM, "yet another bill smith" <bigbill.smith@verizon.net>
+ 33958 [avi@be a4 co] At least on linux, it can be several times faster at rendering pages
  + 33974 [tobiasreif@p] it doesn't even support CSS to any useful degree.
  | 33992 [tom.hurst@cl] Funny, whenever I used Netscape I was bowled over by how mindnumbingly
  | 34020 [avi@be a4 co] Anything based around Gecko is going to be just as bad for me as
  | 34041 [julian@be a4] Well, I also find Netscape to be one of the most painfully
  | 34043 [tobiasreif@p] NN4?
  | 34074 [julian@be a4] Oh yes, I thought I had made that fairly clear.  I have no problems with
  | 34080 [tom.hurst@cl] Opera and Vim both use different GUI toolkits on different OS's.  I
  + 34085 [tom.hurst@cl] Sounds more like a less than wonderful GFX card blitter or something.

Re: [Swig] RE: SWIG/Ruby woes with g++ 3.0
33934 [cfiles@ft .a] Lyle,
33948 [LJohnson@re ] address.
33960 [cfiles@ft .a] I included the your defines into my copy of the current CVS SWIG version.
33961 [LJohnson@re ] for

CGI::Session problems
33943 [dmcnulty@mi ] Argh!
+ 33945 [jfontan@ce g] I think that this part f mod_ruby FAQ should help you
| + 34249 [dmcnulty@mi ] Yes thank you for pointing that out.  Along with a couple other
| + 34389 [patrick-may@] (sorry, I don't remember how to get the rubytalk number at this
+ 33946 [    s@xs .d ] Why do you mix $sess (global variable)
+ 33978 [daniel@ze ed] Daniel P. Zepeda
  34250 [dmcnulty@mi ] Nice extension, especially being able to set the expiry, which is
  34358 [daniel@ze ed] Thank you.
  34372 [matz@ru y- a] It's on my (longish) ToDo list.  Stay tuned.

InterScan NT Alert
33951 [interscan@ts] Sender, InterScan has detected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.

InterScan NT Alert
33953 [interscan@ts] Sender, InterScan has detected virus(es) in your e-mail attachment.

Report to Recipient(s)
33954 [HARCOURT@ha ] Incident Information:-

Report to Recipient(s)
33955 [HARCOURT@ha ] Incident Information:-

Re: Snowhite and the Seven Dwarfs - The REAL story!
33957 [tobiasreif@p] who doesn't already know it; it's a virus.

Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner (Shameless begging)
33959 [gehlker@fa t] Hey Leon. May I please have the ruby without the words. Even better, How
+ 33964 [leon@ug s. a] Sure, it's a chance to exercise some gimp-skills. First image is the
| 33968 [gehlker@fa t] Thanks *so* much. Great images. You've earned a place in the about box for
+ 33994 [ser@ge ma e-] ...
  34002 [gehlker@fa t] Thanks, Sean!
  + 34025 [erik@so id o] The logo was made by a freelancer who works for my company, I will ask him if he
  | 34071 [ser@ge ma e-] Just out of curiosity, does this freelancer use Ruby her/himself?  The Ruby
  + 34164 [mike.spamsuc] that would be me ppl! ;-)

String#delete! null chars?
33962 [chris.morris] irb(main):024:0> a = 'test' << 0
+ 33963 [chris.morris] irb(main):030:0> a = 'test' << 0
+ 33966 [Dave@Pr gm t] a.delete!("\000")
  33967 [chris.morris] a.delete!("\\000")
  33984 [rokosm@kl ka] Interesting... (?)
  33985 [dblack@ca dl] I think the \ is looking for the following 1-3 chars, so your first

RubyCentral's on it's way back
33979 [Dave@Pr gm t] It looks like the good folks at Pearson sent in their check, along

Arguments' positions ambiguity (Was: Keyword arguments)
33982 [Martin.Man@s] ed

Compiled companion language for Ruby?
33988 [erik@so id o] What programming language would you recommend when you need certain
34005 [gehlker@fa t] I *love* ObjC. It seems like a natural companion for Ruby. I don't know

Re: OT OmniWeb [was: Netscape 4.x?]
33989 [ser@ge ma e-] Isn't OmniWeb an old (auld) NeXTSTEP web browser?? What OS are you using?
+ 33991 [rjp@br ws r.] I know nothing of the NeXTSTEP connections, but it's a MacOSX browser and
| 33993 [tom.hurst@cl] Can't say I've seen any situation where anti-aliased fonts do anything
| + 33995 [rjp@br ws r.] It depends on the size, the colours, the monitor, etc.  After using
| | 33997 [tom.hurst@cl] Omniweb just looks blurry to me.  I guess my monitor/res/eyes (17" CRT/
| | + 34003 [david@id om ] flamebate...
| | | 34008 [tom.hurst@cl] Yay, let's see how off topic we can get ;)
| | | 34070 [ser@ge ma e-] Now, that's something you don't see every day.  A Mac user who uses vi.
| | | 34078 [tom.hurst@cl] Unless you're going to talk about Ruby support in editors, or little
| | | 34092 [ser@ge ma e-] <posted & mailed>
| | | 34096 [tom.hurst@cl] -% file /bin/sh
| | | 34123 [ser@ge ma e-] Bad news.  I'm glad I've never encountered it.  It sounds like an advisory
| | | 34157 [tom.hurst@cl] [Dynamically linked /bin]
| | | + 34158 [Dave@Pr gm t] As the Ruby content of this thread seems to have evaporated a while
| | | + 34169 [ser@ge ma e-] There's still an unneccessary attention shift required.  UI studies show
| | + 34007 [ser@ge ma e-] Oh... so you use Linux?
| + 34000 [david@id om ] Omniweb has this a preference...
| + 34006 [ser@ge ma e-] Must be a matter of opinion.  AA fonts look, to my eye, much better --
|   34009 [tom.hurst@cl] Well, actually, having said that, I do use XP's anti-aliasing, but it's
|   34072 [ser@ge ma e-] <nod>  Yes, definately.  AA on lower res screens or smaller font sizes is
+ 33999 [gehlker@fa t] It's been ported to MacX. It seems to rival IE in popularity.

Ruby threading and GUI toolkits
33996 [rich@in oe h] I've encountered a bit of a dilemma.  I need to have a GUI application with
+ 33998 [ps@ra ia .m ] other threads aren't blocked in at least FOX and Gtk. They are allowed to run
+ 34004 [mcix@gm .n t] I do not understand exactly your question. The reason I write is that
  34010 [rich@in oe h] Well, I actually apologize.

ANN: REXML 1.2.7
34001 [ser@ge ma e-] <posted & mailed>

passing blocks
34012 [dcorbin@im e] I understand that every method can have a block passed to it that is
+ 34015 [tobiasreif@p] process1 = proc do |number|
| 34016 [tobiasreif@p] or better
+ 34017 [tom.hurst@cl] def bla

hash as key in hash
34013 [alwagner@tc ] I don't understand why this doesn't work.  Can anyone help?
34018 [tom.hurst@cl] Hashes use the numeric result of the hash method call for any object
+ 34019 [alwagner@tc ] Thanks, Thomas.
| 34296 [chr_news@gm ] Hashing the way you described is actually quite expensive - The following
| 34323 [chr_news@gm ] class MyHash < Hash
+ 34022 [alwagner@tc ] class MyHash < Hash

++ operator
34021 [dcorbin@im e] From digging around, it is my understanding that ++ is not an operator
34023 [alwagner@tc ] [ruby-talk:20183] ++ Operator	2001/08/23
34028 [dcorbin@im e] Right.  I found that already.  But my point was that I didn't get a

Compiled companion language for Ruby?
34024 [erik@so id o] Hmmm, seems that my previous post was in a different thread, I'll try
+ 34026 [pcs3@ma lh s] Objective-C is a great language, and there are optional garbage
+ 34027 [pcs3@ma lh s] Objective-C is a great language, and there are optional garbage
| 34303 [erik@so id o] I had a look at: http://www.rubycentral.com/book/ext_ruby.html
+ 34029 [fokke_wulf@h] Though I've never used it, if I was going to look to optimize my OO and
+ 34068 [ser@ge ma e-] I've been thinking about using Haskell for this; all other (non-lispish) OO
  34302 [erik@so id o] Haskell as an optimized compiled language? I'd doubt that, maybe for domain
  + 34348 [pcs3@ma lh s] So you had never meant to interface their Object Systems directly, but
  | 34368 [erik@so id o] I see the ability to interface directly as an added bonus, because it
  + 34444 [ser@ge ma e-] Interesting.  I don't know much about Haskell, except that it falls in that
  + 34449 [no_spam.2002] I would advise against drawing conclusions for Haskell from my
    34482 [drosih@rp .e] I think we first need to answer the question, "What do we expect to

LocalJumpError when defining each
34030 [junk@ju k. o] The following script seems to work with ruby version 1.6.5, but not with 1.6.6.
34032 [dblack@ca dl] [block not propagating through method calls]
34104 [junk@ju k. o] Thanks for the pointers, David.
34108 [dblack@ca dl] I don't think that will change -- super passes along all the original
34113 [nobu.nokada@] Almost agree.  But I'm not sure whether it's "correct" that
34114 [dblack@ca dl] + args + block
+ 34126 [matz@ru y- a] I think it should be done by super(&nil), which does not work now.
+ 34130 [nobu.nokada@] Maybe.  But it may be a problem there's no way to call super

Hi, this code: text0 = "One $BLAH Three" text1 = "One @BLAH Three" text0.sub!("$BLAH", "Two") text1.sub!("@BLAH", "Two") print text0,"\n" print text1,"\n" produces thiHi, this code: text0 = "One $BLAH Three" text1 = "One @BLAH Three" text0.sub!("$BLAH", "Two") text1.sub!("@BLAH", "Two") print text0,"\n" print text1,"\n" prodQuirk or bug; substituting strings with '$' in them
34031 [jdonner0@ea ] text0 = "One $BLAH Three"

Re: Hi, this code...
34033 [vjoel@PA H. ] Yes, because the first arg to sub! is always used as a regex, even if
threads.html
top