51532-52586

51194-52197 subjects 51671-52716

RDE Abbrev Option
51532 [volkmann2@ch] Can someone tell me the magic key sequence that causes an abbreviation to be
52586 [wvucenic@ne ] Ctrl + K

www.ruby-lang.org maintenance
51561 [shugo@ru y- ] www.ruby-lang.org will be DOWN at Wed Oct 2 4:00:00 UTC for the
52222 [shugo@ru y- ] It was done successfully. Thank you.
52229 [ryand-ruby@z] Shugo, you rock!

[ANN] New announcement-only moderated mailing list
51569 [ryand-ruby@z] With great pleasure, I would like to announce the creation of a
+ 51612 [gsinclair@so] Good idea, but wouldn't it be sensible to keep English-speaking mailing lists
+ 51615 [billtj@z. lu] Will you cc the announcements there to comp.lang.ruby too?  (To me,
  51737 [dsafari@pa a] Depending on how often an "announce" list gets used, hopefully the RWN will

R (was: adding overload to ruby)
51574 [tsiivola@cc ] What I'd *love* would be to keep ruby dynamic as it is, and have a
+ 51576 [bulatz@in eg] my idea is opposite - ruby code with some hints can be effectively
| 51591 [tsiivola@cc ] But never as effectively as purely static code... And when you introduce
| + 51593 [cboos@bc -t ] merd =
| | + 51595 [bulatz@in eg] i think that laguage author is just don't know that language
| | + 51597 [hal9000@hy e] Well, the French abbreviation for OOP
| |   51598 [cboos@bc -t ] Well, I just want to apologize to Pixel, the Merd
| |   51600 [cboos@bc -t ] (sorry, I was too quick on my keyboard)
| + 51621 [billtj@z. lu] I tend to agree with Bulat.  If people think it isn't Ruby anymore, that's
|   + 51623 [probertm@no ] FWIW, a rather unfortunate choice of name...
|   | 51632 [billtj@z. lu] Oops, then should we call it "TRuby" instead?  Well, never mind, this
|   + 51628 [jason@jv eg ] While I certainly don't feel that such things should be a part of Ruby
|   | 51642 [billtj@z. lu] In general I agree with you that *contract* is really a good idea (I think
|   | + 51649 [patrick.benn] Perl has done just fine making it in the corporate/business world, and
|   | | 51686 [billtj@z. lu] I think we *may* have the options of either following a path more like
|   | + 51719 [dblack@ca dl] But they won't, because they'll never have incentive to.  And, even if
|   |   51735 [billtj@y. lu] In principle I agree with you.  I am also aware of the danger of creating
|   + 51679 [batsman.geo@] [deleted]
|   | 51694 [billtj@z. lu] Exactly.  At this point, there is nothing fundamentally changed regarding
|   | + 51708 [batsman.geo@] But all you're getting is "type error" instead of another description.
|   | | 51731 [billtj@y. lu] Agreed.  The error message is just an example; in the real thing it may be
|   | | 51773 [szegedy@t- n] I think it's true.
|   | + 51730 [matz@ru y- a] Do you mean you don't care about dispatching?
|   |   51736 [billtj@y. lu] I am sorry, as I am not an advanced programmer, may I know the exact
|   |   51931 [matz@ru y- a] Your "syntax sugar" just checks types.
|   |   51959 [billtj@z. lu] Oh, I am really sorry, Matz.  I was concentrating more on static
|   + 51741 [tsiivola@cc ] Actually the idea is almost the opposite: Ruby should be dynamic. R Should
|     + 51747 [billtj@y. lu] I think I agree with the above statements; I just want flexibility for
|     | + 51752 [dblack@ca dl] I don't know about the speed of C, but if you want the simplicity
|     | | 51755 [billtj@y. lu] Oh yes, in fact, this is one of our selling points, right?  We show the
|     | | + 51757 [dblack@ca dl] I hope Ruby will continue to be Ruby even if you write this third
|     | | | + 51759 [billtj@y. lu] Exactly.  Right now, I have only two choices.  When I need ease of life, I
|     | | | | + 51761 [alwagner@tc ] Who is this "we" you speak of?
|     | | | | | 51766 [billtj@y. lu] Anyone interested in R, including myself and probably Nikodemus?  :)
|     | | | | | 51777 [robert.calco] I'm currently working on a project I'm calling Ruby/FE, where FE stands for
|     | | | | | 51791 [billtj@y. lu] Thanks for sharing the information.  I will especially be interested in
|     | | | | + 51763 [alan@di ik t] Ruby-C integration really isn't that complicated. In fact, from my use, Ruby
|     | | | | | 51808 [billtj@y. lu] I think it is true in general, but please see also my discussion with Paul
|     | | | | + 51839 [tsiivola@cc ] Definitely.
|     | | | | | 51960 [billtj@z. lu] I am sorry, I am not trying to represent Matz.  But if I am allowed to
|     | | | | + 51928 [bulatz@in eg] c/pascal is last languages without gc. now gc is common aven for
|     | | | + 51997 [qrczak@kn .o] Not that significant. OCaml is fast and garbage-collected. I've
|     | | |   + 52003 [vjoel@PA H. ] IIRC Ruby's GC never moves anything. It's mark and sweep.
|     | | |   + 52008 [billtj@z. lu] Isn't that the "significance" is influenced by the type of gc and the
|     | | |   + 52042 [mikkelfj-ant] There is a technical paper at the OCaml site discussing strict typing versus
|     | | + 51919 [bulatz@in eg] see Eiffel. it's bit old and stupid, i heard that Sather is more
|     | + 51835 [tsiivola@cc ] That would imply one language, would it not: one syntax. It may be doable,
|     | | 51932 [bulatz@in eg] we don't have to lose open classes. these definitions work at
|     | + 51918 [bulatz@in eg] main ruby speed problem - dynamic method dispatching, which don't
|     |   51923 [matz@ru y- a] I'm not sure.  From my simple benchmarks, method cache hit rate is
|     |   51938 [bulatz@in eg] but hash itself need time to work :)  and other dispatching code too.
|     |   51949 [matz@ru y- a] No.  Tree search result is stored in the cache, whose hit rate is more
|     |   51953 [bulatz@in eg] well. consider "2+2" example. when we compile ruby to c, we need to
|     |   + 51969 [billtj@z. lu] Exactly, exactly, Bulat.  I have been thinking exactly the same
|     |   | 52070 [bulatz@in eg] no! c++ analog is NOT USING virtual keyword. and offsets instead of
|     |   | 52090 [tsiivola@cc ] As far as R is concerned I am going to drop into quit head-scratching mode
|     |   | 52092 [bulatz@in eg] i don't understand you clearly, but how about just another ruby-to-c
|     |   | + 52095 [tsiivola@cc ] Definitely a good idea, but not my cup of tea.
|     |   | + 52124 [billtj@y. lu] I think that is exactly the point.  At least one ruby-to-c translator
|     |   + 51975 [batsman.geo@] Do you have any idea about where they might be?
|     |     + 51989 [billtj@z. lu] I guess that's why Java has two data types: the primitive types (such as
|     |     | 52077 [bulatz@in eg] nor c# :(( ;)  but eiffel has better solution
|     |     + 52071 [bulatz@in eg] well, i think that we can combine hashing and offsets for method
|     |       52267 [batsman.geo@] And sometimes per object too.
|     |       52334 [bulatz@in eg] i say about COMBINING dynamic and static approaches
|     |       52365 [batsman.geo@] How? Offset tables for methods known at compile-time and hashes for the
|     |       52366 [bulatz@in eg] yes
|     |       52368 [decoux@mo lo] After syntax analysis, ruby don't know the methods used.
|     |       52372 [bulatz@in eg] ok, "after analysis" :)
|     |       52374 [decoux@mo lo] Same response
|     |       52443 [bulatz@in eg] you are wrong
|     |       52470 [decoux@mo lo] The proof, i.e. a concrete implementation.
|     |       52474 [bulatz@in eg] result of lexical analysis is stream of terms. on the next stages ruby
|     |       52475 [decoux@mo lo] Like I've said : concrete implementation
|     |       52476 [bulatz@in eg] File.new('p.rb').split(/[^a-zA-z0-9$@]/)
|     |       52477 [decoux@mo lo] [[ this is my last message on this subject ]]
|     |       52478 [bulatz@in eg] 10x!
|     + 51795 [batsman.geo@] OK, I'll toy a little with the nature of the R language.
|     | + 51802 [billtj@y. lu] In general I agree with the layout.  The only sticky point is the "have no
|     | + 51844 [tsiivola@cc ] Definitely.
|     |   51866 [batsman.geo@] Then it could be made optional, and better yet, selected at runtime.
|     |   51897 [tsiivola@cc ] Good question. Partially the idea rose out of love of ruby, and dislike of
|     + 52005 [qrczak@kn .o] I don't see how lack of GC can be compatible with dynamic types.
|       + 52010 [billtj@z. lu] I think all the combinations are possible.  For an example of dynamic type
|       + 52020 [qrczak@kn .o] It's unusable in practice. I talked about programming languages which
+ 51584 [     NO@SP M] It has not a Ruby syntax, but it seems to me that Ocaml fits in
| 51770 [szegedy@t- n] 1) It is considerably less concise than Ruby.
| + 51779 [jason@jv eg ] I realize that such benchmarks must be taken with a large grain of salt,
| | 51789 [szegedy@t- n] I was quite biased *for* ocaml because of those benchmarks.
| | + 51813 [frido@q- of ] Are you kidding, the tests are a playground for C programs.
| | + 52482 [kgergely@ml ] and faster, than ruby :)
| + 51812 [frido@q- of ] No it is not, you have to learn it a  bit better.
+ 51636 [gsinclair@so] This is certainly an interesting idea.  If Ruby and R could be automatically
+ 51782 [szegedy@t- n] I would like to have a Ruby like language which is
+ 51788 [dblack@ca dl] Ruby > (Smalltalk + Perl) / 2
  51805 [hal9000@hy e] I just realized why this interesting statement
  + 51806 [billtj@y. lu] Because it is ">" (or even ">="), why should Ruby be *worse* than one of
  | 51827 [bilotta78@ho] (8+2)/2 = 5 ; 6>5 but 6<8
  | 51863 [jason@jv eg ] I think William's point was  (8 + 2)/2 = 5; 50 > 5 and 50 >8.  Meaning
  + 51807 [dblack@ca dl] I'm actually following up on what Bill points out in the next post.
    51816 [hal9000@hy e] Yes, you're both right, of course.
    + 51821 [vjoel@PA H. ] Heh. But that's easy: 00
    + 51846 [dblack@ca dl] Except then everyone would just roll their eyes and say, "Oh, a

Design patterns for communication protocols?
51586 [coma_killen@] I'm about to implement some custom communication protocols for a
+ 51589 [bulatz@in eg] erlang programming language
+ 51637 [hutch@re ur ] On 9/27/02 6:27 AM, "coma_killen@fastmail.fm" <coma_killen@fastmail.fm>
| 51922 [james@ja es ] and
| 51973 [hutch@re ur ] Sorry James, I could have been a lot clearer in my wording. I knew about
| 51995 [james@ja es ] Thanks for pointing this out.  I checked the link to see if it was still
+ 51638 [hutch@re ur ] On 9/27/02 6:27 AM, "coma_killen@fastmail.fm" <coma_killen@fastmail.fm>

OT: merd (was Re: R (was: adding overload to ruby))
51602 [pixel@ma dr ] if u wanna troll, try better ;p
51606 [bulatz@in eg] how many languages you know?
+ 51720 [matz@ru y- a] I'm sure he knows a LOT.  He's a language mania like me.
| 51914 [bulatz@in eg] me too :)
| 51950 [pixel@ma dr ] well i've had pb mailing you privately [*]
| + 51951 [szegedy@no p] A 62 Kl Perl program...
| + 51957 [pbrengard@bc] 62 KSLOC of Perl for DrakX ?
+ 51743 [leikind@mo a] I think http://merd.net/pixel/language-study/ is

REXML Attribute class
51604 [Mark.Volkman] ...

[ANN] Russian Ruby mailing list
51605 [leikind@mo a] A Ruby mailing list in Russian has just been started!
+ 51611 [gsinclair@so] Great to hear it!  I won't be koining, though ;)
| 51634 [gsinclair@so] Nor joining, for that matter.
+ 51690 [ptkwt@sh ll ] horosho!
  51749 [gsinclair@so] I know that means "good" (or more likely "great") because "horrorshow" means
  51758 [ptkwt@sh ll ] Yup.

REXML namespace support
51616 [Mark.Volkman] ...
51622 [kou@cn ti ne] You can use REXML::Element#namespace if you are using a-la DOM API.
51639 [Mark.Volkman] ...
+ 51658 [mgushee@ha e] But you have a Document instance, don't you?
+ 51660 [mgushee@ha e] (REXML::XPath.match(doc,'//*|//@*').detect \
| 51665 [kou@cn ti ne] parser = REXML::SAX2Parser.new(xml)
+ 51962 [hutch@re ur ] XML namespaces are defined as xml is processed. The prefix may be reused.
  + 51965 [Mark.Volkman] ...
  + 51983 [mgushee@ha e] You mean 'prefix-to-namespace mappings are defined ...', don't you? Sorry
    + 51990 [Mark.Volkman] ...
    | 52013 [mgushee@ha e] I'm not sure how to parse that sentence. Is ActiveState doing Ruby now?
    | + 52014 [Mark.Volkman] ...
    | + 52017 [hutch@re ur ] W3C appears to have sanctioned the practice. Personally, I think the idea is
    |   52019 [Mark.Volkman] ...
    |   52022 [hutch@re ur ] Didn't mean to suggest otherwise. My sympathies :-)
    + 51996 [hutch@re ur ] I guess I meant both.
      52004 [mgushee@ha e] True. I used to teach an intro-to-XML course. The students were by no
      + 52016 [hutch@re ur ] [... discussion about XML documents with the same prefix referring to
      + 52027 [mikkelfj-ant] w.r.t.
        52028 [mgushee@ha e] Maybe I'm dense, but I don't follow this at all. Are you saying these
        52037 [mikkelfj-ant] case
        52045 [mgushee@ha e] Okay, it starts to make a bit more sense then. Unfortunately I don't
        52310 [mikkelfj-ant] I was referring to returning the namespace given a namespace prefix, not the

History question
51624 [michael_s_ca] When documenting or discussing ruby code, where did the "#" notation
+ 51626 [decoux@mo lo] See the thread
| 51635 [michael_s_ca] Interesting.  Someone asserted there that # is popular in the java
+ 51627 [bulatz@in eg] CLU! and the whole idea of iterators. excellent idea!
+ 51633 [billtj@z. lu] I think the "Class#method" is just a documentation convention (and not a
  51664 [michael_s_ca] Yes, I was just wondering where it came from.  I mean, being

overloading example
51629 [bulatz@in eg] Best regards,

method called on terminated object
51640 [skywizard@ti] class << Module
+ 51688 [billtj@z. lu] Wait, wait, what do you want to accomplish there?  Although you don't get
| 51710 [skywizard@ti] On Saturday 28 September 2002 03:25, William Djaja Tjokroaminata
+ 51721 [matz@ru y- a] This must be a bug.  I will fix.
  + 51722 [skywizard@ti] Don't have much time to dig through the sources, I must be tired.
  + 51726 [chr_news@gm ] It is probably related to the recent meta-class changes
    51727 [matz@ru y- a] Yes.  This is a same bug.

threads and sleep
51645 [stathy.toulo] I have this code within an initialize method for spawning a new thread to
+ 51676 [kentda@st d.] Slight typo here --^
| 51677 [kentda@st d.] Sorry, s/executing/exiting/
+ 51913 [bulatz@in eg] btw, one of perl critics about ruby is lacking of "use strict"-like tests

[ANN] dbdbd -- David Black's DataBase Definer, version 0.2.0
51646 [dblack@ca dl] dbdbd -- David Black's DataBase Definer, version 0.2.0

[OT] merd (was: Re: R (was: adding overload to ruby))
51647 [batsman.geo@] Don't forget to take a look at merd's pet: merdy.

Still having problems with SMTP send - help!
51650 [patrick@th b] I'm periodically getting these [BUG] errors (not catchable) and I never
+ 51667 [tarasis@bt p] don't understand cause of `sysread': Bad file descriptor (Errno::EBADF)).
| 51678 [patrick.benn] Perhaps this is a stupid question, but how do I go about doing that?
| 51746 [tarasis@bt p] You have to roll your own I believe.
+ 51687 [danny@fr uk ] The Windows socket code in 1.7 aborts with [BUG] everytime winsock
  51689 [patrick.benn] Man, that needs changed quickly!  It needs to raise an exception, not an

RCR: Add Time#atZone
51651 [martindemell] Analogous to Time#gmtime, but sets the time to zone z, where z is
+ 51723 [matz@ru y- a] There's no portable way to handle timezone except for GMT (UTC) and
+ 51734 [akr@m1 n. rg] If you have to parse RFC2822 Date: field, time.rb may help you.

(none)
51654 [Shemp340@ao ] How do I stop getting these e-mails!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RE: Add Time#atZone
51655 [don.womick@c] "inZone" would be more idiomatic English, if that matters. You're "in" an
51697 [dblack@ca dl] in_zone would be more idiomatic Ruby :-)
51744 [martindemell] true

Programming Ruby p103 (Pragmatic Programmer)
51661 [someone@so e] I created the "Inject" module as shown in Programming Ruby, p102-103 and
+ 51670 [dmartenson@m] Do you mean like this?
| + 51673 [vjoel@PA H. ] puts((1..4).sum)
| + 51675 [kentda@st d.] (puts (1..4)).sum
|   51684 [dmartenson@m] is the strongest operator. To me that means that 1.6.7 parsing is wrong and
+ 51674 [kentda@st d.] Let me take a wild guess: You're using puts or print to print the value
  51685 [someone@so e] That was it. I was using puts (1..4).sum. I appreciate all the input from

Visual C++ and RUBY
51666 [bernhard@re ] I am again evaluating RUBY as an embedded scripting language for a large
51692 [lyle@us rs s] Yes, you are correct. The stack is not going to be "unwound" and so your
51695 [billtj@z. lu] Is it a good advertisement for Ruby conference that the web page itself is
51701 [bobx@li ux a] I don't think it speaks one way or the other...my 2 pennies. That would go
threads.html
top