47465-48638 subjects 47824-50175
RE: Using Test::Unit to assert messages appeared on $stdout/$stde rr
47692 [jeff.gray@in] Massimiliano --
+ 47738 [nobu.nokada@] Because StringIO inherits IO but #initialize doesn't call super.
+ 47939 [list@NO PA c] That's because, for some reason now known only to the gods, I made
GC heuristics and GC_MALLOC_LIMIT
47694 [batsman.geo@] BTW, I've been reading gc.c anf the only heuristic seems to be the
What makes a "good" Ruby extension?
47695 [cyclists@nc ] So I'm reading the "Comparing Gui Toolkits" wiki page
+ 47696 [transami@tr ] basic answer: use of OO and code blocks. also shy away from special
+ 47697 [batsman.geo@] I don't really know but I guess it could be being truly OO, allowing the
+ 47700 [hal9000@hy e] wondering,
| 47818 [cyclists@nc ] So I'm reading Hal's 42-item list and in my head it sounds like
| 47819 [hal9000@hy e] Heh... it was something I'd been thinking about awhile.
+ 47701 [lyle@us rs s] I think this is a question that a lot of Ruby programmers struggle with,
+ 47703 [hal9000@hy e] wondering,
+ 47705 [michael_s_ca] Maybe I'm old and set in my ways, but I just read that page and while
47728 [tarasis@bt p] I'm new to Ruby (so apologies for sounding ignorant) but doesn't the
+ 47730 [x@ic im nk .] [snip[
+ 47734 [michael_s_ca] I see your point here and of course, you can contrive any number of situations
Re: What makes a 'good' Ruby extension?
47712 [gsinclair@so] I quite agree. The original expresses the intention much more clearly. I
47717 [girishs@wr x] ...
Re: Some comments on the 167-1 installer
47737 [andy@to ls e] I've put up a new ruby172-2.exe, it has the same CVS base,
+ 47745 [bilotta78@ho] Thank you.
+ 47748 [rich@in oe h] Remember to update the link on RubyCentral ;-)
47750 [andy@to ls e] I'll wait a few days for that -- the idea is that the releases
47767 [andy@to ls e] ...and indeed, there was was a wee problem with the 172-2 that I
47783 [bilotta78@ho] I installed 167-2 --still can't use OpenGL because I miss glut32.dll
+ 47787 [bilotta78@ho] to be fine.
+ 48489 [ oct@zo .o g] This file is also missing from the 1.7 installer (v4) built by Andy a
48551 [lyle@kn lo y] Hope this helps,
What New Language After Ruby?
47749 [billtj@z. lu] I think in the book "The Pragmatic Programmer", one of the advices is to
+ 47751 [alwagner@tc ] I don't know Lisp myself, but based on comments by those who are proficient,
+ 47752 [pate@re -b a] At the pragmatic programmer web site, there is a LoTY project running,
| + 47761 [jfreeze@fr e] My first reaction to the LoTY project was, man you guys
| | 47835 [olczyk@in er] If you want to learn ST why not VisualWorks?
| | 47836 [alwagner@tc ] Right. Is it still free for private user?
| + 47762 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks for the pointers. Uh oh, this year's language is Haskell. I am
| 47863 [nat.pryce@b1] Haskell has a good library for processing XML. In fact, functional
+ 47753 [armin@xs .d ] Have fun experimenting with new languages,
+ 47754 [boognish23@y] Although activity seems to have died down, here are some links
| + 47773 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks for sharing your opinion. However, do you think learning Haskell
| | 47858 [peter@se an ] How about FCS/EPS or Magic or Cesil (for those of you that had a UK
| + 47990 [qrczak@kn .o] Haskell has 10 years. It has 2 alive implementations (ghc & nhc),
| 48024 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks a lot, Marcin, for the valuable information. The description on
| 48036 [nat.pryce@b1] Haskell and ML have static typing with powerful generics and type
| + 48195 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks a lot for presenting an objective comparison among the four
| | 48201 [nat.pryce@b1] I have not used any of these languages in combination with C, so I
| | 48208 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks for responding to my query. Do you mean "Structure and
| | + 48211 [nat.pryce@b1] That's the one. All examples and exercises are in Scheme. It is not a
| | + 48279 [frido@q- of ] I would argue that interfacing to C is a sort of "minimal" requirement
| | 48289 [bilotta78@ho] (1) is Ruby faster than Java? (I don't have special GUI requirements.
| | 48291 [frido@q- of ] Find out for yourself on http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/
| | 48295 [bilotta78@ho] Thanks.
| + 48278 [frido@q- of ] Well that is not fully true. Common Lisp does have CLOS which does
| | + 48282 [dido@im er u] They're called monads, and they're somewhat more confusing to use than
| | | + 48283 [frido@q- of ] I would think one can live with it. But anyway we are a bit too
| | | + 48294 [nat.pryce@b1] Exactly. Currying is not supported by the language. Although it can be
| | | 48318 [billtj@z. lu] Based on the comparison example, is it true that in general Haskell code
| | | + 48319 [nat.pryce@b1] Function definitions are probably more concise in Haskell than in
| | | + 48385 [frido@q- of ] I do not understand why short automatically means better. Even in Ruby
| | + 48424 [qrczak@kn .o] They aren't in the standard but they are present in all four
| | + 48453 [dido@im er u] Really? I thought that the definition of a lazy language was that when
| | + 48470 [qrczak@kn .o] In Haskell evaluation of an expression can't have a side effect
| + 48313 [kgergely@ml ] Printing to stdout cannot be done without side-effect :)
| 48356 [batsman.geo@] Isn't this stuff handled via continuations?
| 48387 [pbrengard@bc] The best language of last year seems to be Haskell.
+ 47755 [kgergely@ml ] Well, what about ocaml?
+ 47756 [chrismo@cl b] ...
+ 47758 [matz@ru y- a] I remember Dave once said his language for the year 2001 was Japanese.
| + 47775 [billtj@z. lu] I think it is really true that the language after Ruby should really be
| + 47798 [batsman.geo@] Come on... He's a Pragmatic Programmer, not a Utopian one :-)
| + 47806 [billtj@z. lu] Very interesting thought, Mauricio. I think there was an article in
| + 47810 [wpinelo@ho m] really ?
| 47813 [DDouthitt@cu] ...
| 47814 [DDouthitt@cu] ...
+ 47774 [bilotta78@ho] I'll assing you Poplog. This will require you to learn POP-11, Prolog
| + 47776 [billtj@z. lu] No problem, Giuseppe, as long as you can assure me that result of doing
| | 47778 [bilotta78@ho] Well, I don't know if it would ever do as The Ultimate Language (I
| | 47780 [billtj@z. lu] Uh oh, then we may have a slight problem, Giuseppe, because for my
| | 47784 [bilotta78@ho] What I don't like about Emacs is Lisp --that's the reason why I was
| + 47788 [rawlins@cs u] I had Robin Popplestone, the creator of POP-1, for my "programming
| 47840 [bilotta78@ho] Actually, I'd like to thank you for sharing these memories with us.
+ 47779 [szegedy@no p] I have learnt OCAML some month ago and it seems to be a really nice language,
| 47794 [john@jo nk i] Please consider "arc" which is introduced at
+ 47792 [dan@si he or] Folks have already thrown Lisp, OCaml, Prolog, and Japanese into the
| 47904 [gsinclair@so] Can I ask why? People say it all the time, but I point-blank refuse to believe
| + 47920 [alan@di ik t] When you start comparing language speeds, you really need to add some
| | 47981 [gsinclair@so] Thanks very much to all who gave information on Fortran vs. C. It made
| | 48014 [billtj@z. lu] You can find a more "formal" description of why Fortran can be faster than
| + 47926 [comp.lang.ru] - - No. C is much more complicated that Fortran ( at least
| + 47929 [Tim.Hunter@s] Well, it's been 10-15 years since I was in the position of comparing
| + 47938 [dan@si he or] That's fine. You'd be wrong in your lack of belief. :)
+ 47850 [dido@im er u] What's wrong with Lisp, or functional programming in general? I've done
| 47877 [billtj@y. lu] There is nothing wrong with functional programming in general. It is only
| 47881 [dido@im er u] To blow away your argument that functional programs are not widely used
| + 47893 [billtj@y. lu] Probably it suffices to say that each organization, company, or
| + 47903 [hal9000@hy e] I like the way you think. Can I
| 47925 [comp.lang.ru] - - Me too. where is the magical land of ph ? I just left my last
| 47984 [dido@im er u] Heck, I might just have been lucky... I work at a small software company
+ 47885 [jostein.bern] Regards,
+ 47956 [elanthis@aw ] Something I've found to be incredibly enlightening is trying to write my
Puzzeled by Range object
47757 [duemoko@bi f] I was just writing an example for the "power of ruby" thread, using ranges.
+ 47763 [decoux@mo lo] Range can work only up.
| + 47804 [batsman.geo@] What about this?
| | + 47856 [juergen.kati] Better use * while ( a < last ) * or you
| | + 47857 [peter@se an ] However you might write come code such as
| | 47911 [batsman.geo@] Then I'll give another name for the new iterator with the other
| + 48706 [qrczak@kn .o] It breaks the property that (1..n) has n elements even for n==0.
+ 47768 [Ephaeton@gm ] Yes.
+ 47771 [rubytalk@bo ] Ranges works in upward direction only ... and while I don't know the
47759 [kgergely@ml ] I want to sort a number of File::Stat object due to the user's choice.
+ 47769 [decoux@mo lo] Something like this ?
+ 47901 [gsinclair@so] No you cant.
47760 [kgergely@ml ] Is there a way to find out the OS version from ruby?
47766 [djberge@qw s] I have written a module called Sys::Uname that does this. It's an extension
+ 47777 [hal9000@hy e] extension
+ 47782 [kgergely@ml ] Well, the only thing I need it for is to detect windows :)
+ 47790 [andy@to ls e] ...and the difference would be what, exactly?
+ 47793 [dossy@pa op ] You could test for ENV["windir"] or ENV["COMSPEC"] on Win98, at least.
47795 [cbroult@sa i] ...
47796 [djberge@qw s] Do you mean that you just need to know the platform *name* (and not the
[OT] Matz's book ?
47764 [shanko_date@] Is the book "The Ruby Programming Language" by Matz
How to negate regexps in case?
47765 [ViacheslavPo] I would like to know if it's possible to negate regexps in
+ 47786 [alwagner@tc ] if line === something
+ 47831 [behrends@cs ] You can often use the negative lookahead operator to simulate that
47838 [alwagner@tc ] Thanks, Reimer. I really need to learn more regex. I'm keeping this email.
Amortized cost of garbage collection
47770 [batsman.geo@] Even without safe_malloc, you may have more than 8MB garbage at a given
47816 [billtj@z. lu] Yes, I have thought the case of when at one time, say, the threshold is M
47833 [batsman.geo@] The sweep must check _all_ the objects to find which ones haven't been
47875 [billtj@y. lu] Thanks a lot, Mauricio, for the comprehensive treatment of the
47781 [szegedy@no p] I would like to write a function which evaluates
47791 [kentda@st d.] What version are you using? I get "1" on both
47797 [szegedy@no p] You are right.
Reminder: Pike Conference 2002
47785 [jhs@pi e. da] Last Call for Participation
retour de vacances
47789 [usaforevers@] salut c cathy
select on solaris
47799 [putsch@mx m.] Howdy,
+ 47803 [putsch@mx m.] Sorry, I botched the simple program. Here are two simple examples
| + 47809 [djberge@qw s] I *highly* recommend rebuilding Ruby on 2.8. It's a big enough pain to get
| + 47821 [putsch@mx m.] I know err is an IO object. My choice of words was cleary poor. The
| 47826 [djberge@qw s] Hmm..ok. Without any testing on my own whatsoever, would testing against
| 47829 [putsch@mx m.] #!/usr/sepp/bin/ruby
+ 47834 [behrends@cs ] What you describe is actually normal behavior for select().
| 47837 [putsch@mx m.] Thanks,
+ 47839 [jfh@ci e. fl] I ran into something like the programming in C: it seemed that select
WIN32OLE.connect IIS hangs ruby?
47800 [chrismo@cl b] require 'win32ole'
47812 [chrismo@cl b] Oh yeah - Ruby 1.6.6 - mswin
[ ANN ] TCLink credit card processing extension
47801 [dan@tr st om] I've just implemented a new extension called TCLink that allows credit
ANN: scanf for Ruby
47802 [hal9000@hy e] This is the product of the Austin Ruby Codefest 2002,
+ 47846 [bobx@li ux a] Very nice...thanks guys!
+ 48389 [matz@ru y- a] This sounds great. Can I put this into the standard 1.7 distribution?
48432 [hal9000@hy e] Thanks, Matz...
48451 [matz@ru y- a] class IO
+ 48456 [hal9000@hy e] Yes, I understand.
| 48458 [dblack@ca dl] Also it (block version) keeps scanning as long as it's getting
+ 48459 [dblack@ca dl] (etc.)
[OT] Re: What New Language After Ruby?
47815 [batsman.geo@] Ooops, I'll have to update the FAQ ;-)
A Repeat: New Language After Ruby?
47817 [billtj@z. lu] I am sorry that there have been so many responses; it is very hard to
+ 47820 [james@ja es ] <snip />
| + 47825 [akolarik@so ] ...
| | 47855 [transami@tr ] i've played with rebol, it a lisp derivation, certainly. the best thing
| + 47827 [Dave@Pr gm t] Well.. I'd say learning Haskell, or OCaml, or Ruby, is pragmatic. Each
| + 47844 [james@ja es ] Well, there's the paradox: pursuing the exotic is, ultimately, a very
| + 47880 [billtj@y. lu] Thinking about this issue further, it seems to me that being pragmatic is
| + 47896 [nat.pryce@b1] Yes. Haskell code can make calls to C. That's how I/O, user
| | 47914 [billtj@y. lu] Thanks for the info. I have scanned the Haskell web page, but the answer
| + 47902 [gsinclair@so] The lsnguage you mention most is C. Why not learn advanced C?
| + 47985 [dido@im er u] Right. The main use I've had for functional programming languages these
| | 48016 [billtj@z. lu] I agree with the prototyping thing. In fact, that is what I just did. I
| | 48025 [tran55555@ya] Longtime ago, I saw the 3 volumes of books,
| + 48838 [charleshixsn] Any language that includes C as a proper subset will have problems with
| 48841 [dan@si he or] Another Urban Legend strikes! :)
| + 48842 [hal9000@hy e] included
| | + 48843 [dan@si he or] D'oh! I misread that. I've seen so many "C is really X assembly
| | + 48846 [dossy@pa op ] It's a 5-7-5 haiku. I wonder if Dan originated it, but the
| | 48851 [dan@si he or] It's not mine, though I abused it into the haiku--I got it originally
| + 48848 [charleshixsn] That may be so, but it's still true that somebody built a macro assembler for
+ 47828 [batsman.geo@] If you think Perl's syntax is "easy, clean, short and regular" just
+ 47847 [bpdp@3w i. e] [sorry for delete some portion of text]
| + 47889 [billtj@y. lu] In my opinion, Eiffel is being in the middle, i.e., its performance is
| | + 47909 [peter@se an ] This 'middle' thing is why Python never quite clicked for me as a Perl
| | | + 47923 [ jimm@io co ] That is the only reason I translated DataVision from Ruby to Java. The code
| | | | 47936 [transami@tr ] now that's interesting.
| | | | + 47944 [ jimm@io co ] I'm not sure. DataVision has a large user base now and I can't abandon
| | | | | + 47947 [alan@di ik t] Is the XML format of your reports fairly stable? Someone else could almost
| | | | | | 47954 [ jimm@io co ] Yes, it's fairly stable. See 'report.dtd' which comes with DataVision.
| | | | | + 48311 [transami@tr ] i'm going to ask anyway ;-)
| | | | + 48839 [charleshixsn] FWIW, the last three projects I've started the lack of a decent GUI solution
| | | | + 48840 [charleshixsn] FWIW, the last three projects that I've started, the lack of a decent GUI was
| | | + 48154 [web2ed@ya oo] This is one of the best most succint posts of the year! I couldn't
| | | 48157 [transami@tr ] one word: GUtopIa
| | + 47910 [peter@se an ] This 'middle' thing is why Python never quite clicked for me as a Perl
| + 47912 [batsman.geo@] In addition, the language is straightforward and includes very little
| 47948 [csh_hatespam] Well, it's his baby... I personally found it a little hard to deal with.
| + 47951 [dan@si he or] This is one of the driving forces behind Parrot's getting ports of
| + 47952 [billtj@y. lu] Very well said, Charles. I completely agree with you.
| | + 48032 [comp.lang.ru] - - Well, two years ago I would have been right with you. Why spend
| | | + 48034 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Is it really true that Ruby is in many
| | | | + 48063 [comp.lang.ru] - - The functional language purists would probably shoot me for
| | | | + 48072 [batsman.geo@] Some people say the essence of functional programming is having no side
| | | | | 48240 [gsinclair@so] I dispute that Lisp is THE functional language. Mind you, I don't know much
| | | | | 48281 [frido@q- of ] Well that is not exactly true. Lisp can be used in a functional way,
| | | | + 48280 [frido@q- of ] The blocks are what makes Ruby so functional. I would argue those
| | | + 48057 [list@NO PA c] That's the word this thread has been waiting for.
| | | | 48058 [Dave@Pr gm t] I believe that one of the reasons humans are programmed to play is so
| | | + 48176 [qrczak@kn .o] In one way it is: it makes great use of anonymous functions with
| | + 48194 [szegedy@no p] OCaml can be extended easily extended by C-functions. (It's a bit more
| | 48196 [billtj@z. lu] Thanks for sharing your opinion. I completely agree with you. I think
| | 48199 [ken.lacrosse] I'm going for OCaml myself. I make my living doing Perl in a Fortune 50 (at
| + 47953 [csh_hatespam] Crap, crap, crap!
| | 47957 [transami@tr ] oh sure... now take it back ;-)
| + 48174 [qrczak@kn .o] You don't have to use GreenCard (which is kind of obsolete). You can
+ 47883 [tran55555@ya] Like other programmers, I did learn and use some languages.
47895 [Dave@Pr gm t] Learning a language means coming to understand it: the philosophy, the
47915 [jfreeze@fr e] That is interesting because years ago all I heard was how