62941-66151

62710-65057 subjects 63073-65058

^ loop while
62941 [tim bates.id] loop while t.gets !~ /[Cc]onnected/
+ 62942 [matt lickey.] while t.gets !~ /[Cc]onnected/; end
+ 62943 [eban os.rim.] while t.gets !~ /[Cc]onnect/ do end
  62945 [botp delmont] cool :-)
  62948 [decoux moulo] You have written something like this

^ euc-jp coding of ruby talk web interface
62944 [fritz.heinri] recently the coding of ruby talk web interface has changed to
62946 [AntiATField_] Is UTF-8 a superset of EUC-JP, that is, including not only the Japanese
62952 [ysantoso jen] UTF-8 is an encoding for the Unicode character set. EUC-JP is an
62964 [AntiATField_] "at least"...
62994 [ysantoso jen] Familiarity, habit, and the lack of compelling incentives to
62998 [ysantoso jen] BTW, ruby accepts UTF-8 strings. Its regex can also operate on UTF-8
63007 [AntiATField_] Which does every 8-bit clean language.
63023 [matz ruby-la] More than that.  Ruby's regex does handle characters so that the

^ OSCON Ruby presentations?
62950 [chad chadfow] have submitted proposals for talks/tutorials at OSCON?  It would be sad to
+ 62985 [ptkwt shell1] The second one isn't directly Ruby related, but if it's accepted I plan to
+ 63010 [matz ruby-la] Do you want to hear my talk at OSCON?
  + 63012 [pate eylerfa] YES!!!!
  | 63022 [dblack candl] c) is definitely the best of the three possibilities.  July is awfully
  | + 63026 [pate eylerfa] You're probably right, but it can't hurt to dream about another RubyConf
  | + 63068 [chad chadfow] Agreed here.  Especially in terms of geographic spread.   We've done east
  |   64799 [matz ruby-la] Since half day or full day tutorial, which enable travel expense
  + 63042 [ptkwt shell1] Sure.
  + 63069 [piers ompa.n] I think people would go a long wa yto hear you talk :-)
    63084 [simon simon-] I'm talking with Gnat on Friday and will see what I can do; I'm aiming

^ Questions from a Ruby Newbie (file io and data structures)...
62951 [christopher.] I've decided on a small project to attempt to learn Ruby beyond just flipping
+ 62953 [dblack candl] Here's a way to do this with the Matrix class.  (It assumes
| 62959 [dblack candl] m = Matrix[ *
| 62960 [christopher.] David,
| 62961 [dblack candl] See the new, improved version in my next message....  As for docs,
| 62965 [martindemell] The main difference is that a Matrix is rectangular (an Array is a 1-D
+ 62958 [szegedy nosp] I haven't tested, but it should work.

^ Fox and Mac OS X
62954 [jim freeze.o] Sorry for the intrusion, but I thought someone here may be experiencing
63035 [hisa imasy.o] I tested hello and hello2 in fox/tests. Both result were "Bus
63051 [jim freeze.o] Wow, thanks for the info. I must say, I think it is weird

^ initialize() and C extensions
62955 [tim bates.id] I'm having a problem with extending TCPSocket, and after some discussion on
+ 62956 [decoux moulo] The error message is for ::new not for #initialize
+ 62963 [lyle users.s] Look at the source code for the TCPSocket class from Ruby 1.6.8 (in

^ Use mulit-dim. Arrays? [Questions from a Ruby Newbie (file io and d ata structures)...]
62966 [christopher.] I've got the file IO hammered out. I think I can read each line into a string
+ 62975 [ahoward fsl.] one of the things that i LOVE, LOVE, LOVE about ruby is that it's so easy to
| 62984 [dcarrera mat] Thank you for posting that script.  I learned a fair bit from it.
| 63053 [botp delmont] [snipped very good reply]
+ 62982 [szegedy nosp] Have not you read my previous mail? I answered all your question with 2 lines of

^ What objects exist in my namespace?
62968 [christopher.] How can I determine at runtime what objects exist within the namespace of my
62969 [gsinclair so] See ObjectSpace in ri or Pickaxe.

^ FileTest.size? vs du -b
62973 [antispam fak] I've noticed something curious.  I was throwing together a small script
+ 62974 [lyle users.s] 'du' reports the disk usage, or how much space on the disk is allocated
+ 62976 [ahoward fsl.] du -> 'disk usage'
| 62977 [antispam fak] Well, what I eventually want to do is have a script that fills CDRs up to
| + 62978 [ahoward fsl.] i'm pretty sure that summing FileTest.size for all files bound for CDR would
| + 62986 [kentda stud.] Measuring in blocks for the target filesystem would be the correct way.
|   62988 [antispam fak] Good idea regarding the blocks.  Thank you for that very helpful link.
+ 66151 [qrczak knm.o] You can't because on some filesystems files can have physical holes

^ Aliasing class methods
62979 [google tompa] I'd like to override File.open so that it automatically searches for a
+ 62980 [decoux moulo] You have written an alias for an instance method, for a class method
| 62981 [ahoward fsl.] why does this work with barewords vs. symbols/strings?
| 62983 [decoux moulo] alias is a keyword, #alias_method is a method
+ 63039 [gsinclair so] Guy has answer, I'll expand in case you didn't fully get it, and then
  63233 [google tompa] Guy & Gavin, thanks for the answer.
  63274 [gsinclair so] Fair enough.  When you perfect it, can you post the code so I can add

^ start ruby in java
62987 [per.mikael.l] This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
63086 [flifson cs.u] Have a look at jRuby, a Ruby interpreter written in Java.

^ pth thread in extension
62989 [parisnight s] I tried to pth_spawn a thread in an extension library.
62993 [nobu.nokada ] Current implementation is not native thread safe.  There is no

^ Usaha Bisnis Mandiri (online-offline)
62990 [mandiribash2] Halo rekan netter..

^ Net::TElnet help
62991 [Greg.Brondo ] Is it possible that in the ruby-installer version of ruby (1.7.3) that
63099 [probertm NOS] "Brondo, Greg" <Greg.Brondo@allegiancetelecom.com> did say ...
63154 [greg brondo.] Thanks!  It was a pebkac (problem exists between keyboard and chair).!  I

^ rubynet-announce digest, Vol 1 #23 - 2 msgs
62992 [rubynet-anno] Send rubynet-announce mailing list submissions to

^ Perl \G in Ruby regex?
62995 [cwong amazon] In Perl, \G matches the end position of the last match.
63006 [nobu.nokada ] \G works in String#gsub(!), #scan and #index.

^ ping with ruby
62996 [saspurss lib] How can I do a script in ruby that to do a ping.
+ 62997 [lyle users.s] ...
| + 63020 [saspurss lib] Error
| | 63028 [drbrain segm] That's not a string, use "192.168.1.1"
| | 63032 [saspurss lib] It is not good, I have this error if I use "192.168.1.1"
| | 63033 [pate eylerfa] Actually, this is good.  It means that you are actually making ICMP
| | 63034 [saspurss lib] if by my pc I ping my ip address (192.168.1.1), it's ok.
| | 63043 [eban os.rim.] FAQ
| | 63062 [saspurss lib] Ok script is ok if I use Net::PingExternal.new.
| | 63098 [djberge qwes] require "net/pingsimple"
| + 63986 [gminick unde] <http://raa.ruby-lang.org/list.rhtml?name=icmpmodule>
+ 63018 [rubytalk box] The following source comes from RAA and it's modified by me

^ Connecting to a database..
62999 [smurdon dnam] This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
+ 63001 [ysantoso jen] The big two are ODBC and DBI. I prefer DBI. The ruby-dbi package is at
| 63013 [paul snake.n] It won't show you specially how to connect with ADO, but you can find
| 63016 [CRIBBSJ oakw] By the way, Paul, I wanted to thank you for that article.  I had it by my
| 63017 [paul snake.n] Thanks.  Glad it was useful.  By the way, the second edition just came out
+ 63091 [chrismo clab] # Here's an ADO example
  63182 [smurdon dnam] This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

^ webrick server performance?
63000 [jsuntheimer ] characteritics of webrick servers?  What are the limiting factors?

^ SEGFAULT : when switching between windows
63009 [jason persam] I'm getting a segfault after doing some stuff within my FXRuby app, then switching focus to a
+ 63011 [vjoel PATH.B] Do GC.disable and try to recreate the segfault. It might be a problem
| 63015 [jason persam] Hmm... that seems to work.  I guess it's possible that disabling garbage-collection simply hid the
| 63019 [vjoel PATH.B] You're right. The problem is only hidden and will resurface as soon as
| 63027 [jason persam] Woot!  I've narrowed the problem down to a single line.
+ 63038 [lyle users.s] I see that Joel has already responded and you may have a workaround; but
  63063 [jason persam] Lyle,

^ program name -> perl's $0
63024 [lists debona] Anyone have a reference to all the special variable names? In particular
+ 63025 [dcarrera mat] $ cat >example.rb
| 63029 [lists debona] Gah, I keep shooting myself in the foot when trying to use it in quotes,
| 63031 [dcarrera mat] I don't know of any such list.  The best I can find is this (probably
+ 63030 [gsinclair so] I'm sure you can find information like that in the Pickaxe.  If not,
| 63037 [cyclists nc.] Speaking of the Pickaxe, I see that amazon.com is offering used copies for
| 63079 [botp delmont] fr my winpc...
+ 63036 [aa204 acorn.] Have a look in English.rb

^ Ruby support for PHP
63040 [maxim php.ne] Guys,
+ 63080 [botp delmont] just do it! It's great really.
+ 63083 [a.bokovoy sa] / Alexander Bokovoy

^ List of $foo as of 1.4 (Was: Re: program name -> perl's $0)
63041 [drbrain segm] Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net

^ RAA short descriptions
63057 [gsinclair so] To all RAA package authors,
63186 [lausianne gm] I agree. As long as there are only a few A's on RAA, it is still

^ Compiling Ruby 1.6.7 on TRU64 Unix V4.0F
63060 [stufuller us] Having trouble compiling Ruby 1.6.7 on TRU64 Unix V4.0F on an Alpha ES40.

^ $SAFE level mutation for tained classes
63061 [bystr mac.co] What is the rationale behind the following change in SAFE level when
+ 63064 [bruce codedb] => nil
| 63076 [bystr mac.co] Thank you so very much!!! I completely forgot about "send", I replaced
+ 63070 [matz ruby-la] Method objects are tainted if they retrieved from tainted objects.

^ Local variables & blocks
63065 [ahoward fsl.] in general, i like the way things work, but occansionally would like to be
+ 63066 [tim bates.id] I like it. I'm forever defining a variable as nil outside a block so it
+ 63072 [gsinclair so] puts max    >>> 42
| 63075 [gsinclair so] puts max    >>>> 42
| + 63087 [batsman.geo ] matz has already explained his plans on this [52440].
| | 63100 [matz ruby-la] I may drop ':=' part, i.e.
| | + 63103 [ahoward fsl.] so, correct me if i am wrong, but this does not address the need to do
| | | + 63119 [matz ruby-la] * no other way to make block local variables
| | | | + 63124 [ahoward fsl.] o.k.  i understand.
| | | | | 63125 [vjoel PATH.B] That's how it works now, isn't it?
| | | | | 63128 [ahoward fsl.] whoa.  to little sleep!  apologies.  that is, of course, how it works now.  i
| | | | | 63129 [martindemell] may act differently since object would now _always_ be defined.  it seems like
| | | | | 63131 [ahoward fsl.] result =
| | | | | + 63133 [martindemell] Yes, but my point was, when doing this, I usually have either object
| | | | | | 63143 [ahoward fsl.] require 'tons_of_stuff'
| | | | | | 63203 [martindemell] But method-level scoping still works as before, so I don't see the
| | | | | | + 63211 [ahoward fsl.] module M
| | | | | | | + 63214 [decoux moulo] module always push a new local scope
| | | | | | | | 63218 [ahoward fsl.] but what if you 'include' the module?
| | | | | | | | 63219 [decoux moulo] include dont have effect on local variable : local variables are
| | | | | | | | 63223 [ahoward fsl.] i know that's the way it is _now_, i was talking about what would happen if
| | | | | | | + 63263 [matz ruby-la] Probably you misunderstood "block local variables" either the current
| | | | | | |   63272 [ahoward fsl.] yes. i have confused scope with namespaces, but not entirely i think.
| | | | | | |   63277 [nobu.nokada ] # defined?(x)
| | | | | | |   63282 [ahoward fsl.] right.
| | | | | | + 63480 [jos catnook.] Since we're talking about lexical scope here, how about using ``my'' instead
| | | | | + 63418 [B.Candler po] Yes, but a variable going out of scope is not the same as a variable being
| | | | |   + 63422 [transami tra] and foo? that would remain local to the block, but not myvar?
| | | | |   + 63423 [B.Candler po] Actually I'm not quite sure whether the proposal is to fix that, or not.
| | | | |     + 63428 [decoux moulo] If I've well understood you have removed the most important part of this
| | | | |     | 63430 [B.Candler po] I did. I'm just not really qualified to comment. But I will anyway :-)
| | | | |     | 63442 [transami tra] sure you are. i really just needed some feed back to stir my own brain cells.
| | | | |     | 63457 [batsman.geo ] Then again, instead of calling it 'scope' you can call it local
| | | | |     + 63436 [matz ruby-la] 10.
| | | | |       + 63439 [B.Candler po] Unfortunately, although I receive ruby-talk in digest form, there are some
| | | | |       | 63482 [decoux moulo] * all variables are local except variables found between || which are
| | | | |       | 63485 [B.Candler po] Thanks, I just wasn't sure of the definition of "shadowing". As far as I can
| | | | |       | 63486 [decoux moulo] Probably I'm wrong, but I don't think that it will be possible to turn off
| | | | |       | 63491 [B.Candler po] But it's not a local variable - it's a formal parameter to a block. At
| | | | |       | 63492 [decoux moulo] You have found where is your problem, ruby don't see it like this
| | | | |       | 63495 [B.Candler po] Ugh! Thanks though, that helps me see how the current behaviour (|x| assigns
| | | | |       | + 63496 [decoux moulo] Not really sure but I think that you'll get a warning if you put something
| | | | |       | | 63501 [B.Candler po] Hmm. Well, that's made me think. I have a suggestion which is even more
| | | | |       | | 63502 [decoux moulo] What do you do with Thread and Proc which *need* block local variables ?
| | | | |       | | 63507 [B.Candler po] Hmm. ISTM that if this is a problem, it will affect Matz's [63100] as well.
| | | | |       | | + 63508 [decoux moulo] What is the result if you have different Proc created in the same def, but
| | | | |       | | | 63510 [B.Candler po] I said threads were still a problem :-)
| | | | |       | | | 63511 [B.Candler po] Well, you said that the block parameters would be local, shadowing if
| | | | |       | | | + 63512 [decoux moulo] See [ruby-talk:63199] http://www.ruby-talk.org/63199
| | | | |       | | | | 63514 [matz ruby-la] In the current behavior.  'i' will not be block local, so that it will
| | | | |       | | | | + 63516 [ahoward fsl.] i like all of your plan _except_ this.  i'm not a brilliant programmer, but
| | | | |       | | | | | 63530 [matz ruby-la] Hmm, so what is better behavior do you think?  I think explicit block
| | | | |       | | | | + 63518 [batsman.geo ] This is one of the cases where I really want to be able to create
| | | | |       | | | + 63513 [matz ruby-la] Block parameters are only way to create block local variables, but
| | | | |       | | + 63509 [matz ruby-la] No.  Unlike yours, mine still has sort of block local variabls.
| | | | |       | | | + 63519 [ahoward fsl.] insane?  i don't think so to me this is _natural_ as in Cs
| | | | |       | | | | + 63522 [B.Candler po] Right.
| | | | |       | | | | | + 63523 [B.Candler po] No, it's not fork: I meant cloning only the local variables (stack frame).
| | | | |       | | | | | + 63629 [B.Candler po] I think I've at least made a start now.
| | | | |       | | | | |   63644 [jweirich one] That's exactly how its done.  The trick is to removed the "me" variable
| | | | |       | | | | |   + 63648 [B.Candler po] It returns an array of two procs: one which gives you the current value of
| | | | |       | | | | |   | 63653 [jweirich one] Yes.
| | | | |       | | | | |   + 63649 [pit capitain] thanks for the weird Y fun :-)
| | | | |       | | | | |     63654 [jweirich one] Yes, it is the same.  While thinking about the proposed rules for block
| | | | |       | | | | |     + 63660 [B.Candler po] All this has made look back at the Abelson and Sussman book, and I find
| | | | |       | | | | |     | + 63665 [michael_s_ca] Can someone list a synopsis of the new rules (or have I missed that?)
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | + 63667 [B.Candler po] def weird1
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | 63668 [B.Candler po] (1) Block parameters - e.g. |i,j| - are always local to the block,
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | 63671 [gsinclair so] Please justify why this warning is necessary.  The code you give above
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | 63686 [ms iastate.e] Essentially, the warning ends up saying: The scoping rules are improved
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | 63693 [decoux moulo] You don't think that it exist a problem when someone ask for warnings
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | + 63698 [B.Candler po] I was asking for something different, and I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | | + 63699 [B.Candler po] Oh and just to be clear, I'm not asking for any sort of data-flow analysis;
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | | + 63701 [matz ruby-la] But I still hate shadowing, strong enough to raise warning.
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | |   63707 [B.Candler po] I think we'd all be reasonably happy with this warning as long as we
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | |   63724 [nobu.nokada ] Although I agree that shadowing is one of the worst manners, it
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | |   + 63725 [matz ruby-la] Example?
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | |   | 63728 [nobu.nokada ] foo = 0
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | |   + 63730 [ahoward fsl.] why such strong feelings?
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | | + 63700 [ms iastate.e] Is that not why we have -w? Use it and you get extra guidance in the
| | | | |       | | | | |     | | + 63672 [bob.news gmx] The proposed new rule is that a variable introduced in a block (other than
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |   + 63682 [B.Candler po] Where "the enclosing scope" means the entire enclosing method. So if you
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |   | 63683 [B.Candler po] That's something I've been meaning to ask for: please can ruby -w generate a
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |   + 63713 [nobu.nokada ] nil doesn't have method `+'.
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |     63743 [bob.news gmx] <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |     + 63749 [nobu.nokada ] It looks better as an example.
| | | | |       | | | | |     | |     + 63754 [dblack candl] def andy_summers(*args)
| | | | |       | | | | |     | + 63670 [matz ruby-la] There will be provided a way to use block local variables, like local
| | | | |       | | | | |     + 64913 [thh io.ocn.n] ...
| | | | |       | | | | + 63531 [matz ruby-la] Insane for languages like Ruby which do not have explicit declaration.
| | | | |       | | | |   63539 [qrczak knm.o] For me it's a flaw of a model if it requires local variables to be
| | | | |       | | | + 63548 [pit capitain] Don't be so harsh to yourself! Nobody's perfect. I like your proposed
| | | | |       | | |   63550 [matz ruby-la] I'd made it as I proposed this time, I think.  The current design is
| | | | |       | | + 63515 [ahoward fsl.] this is called fork, and ipc is neither fun nor portable.
| | | | |       | + 63497 [batsman.geo ] I think matz planned to use the implicit ':=' for block-locals and '='
| | | | |       |   63499 [decoux moulo] Yes, see [ruby-talk:52462]
| | | | |       + 63441 [gsinclair so] Sorry for being so dense.  Can you confirm the propsed output of the
| | | | |         63450 [matz ruby-la] Sorry for being terse.  Ask me anything if you have question.
| | | | |         + 63451 [B.Candler po] Then it seems that your 'scope' object is really just the (implicit) stack
| | | | |         + 63473 [gsinclair so] That's good; I like it!
| | | | + 63156 [gsinclair so] This makes it the same, scope-wise, as
| | | | | + 63159 [pbrannan atd] void foo() {
| | | | | | + 63161 [gsinclair so] Now *that* is surprising!  I assumed that the braceless (one-line)
| | | | | | | 63162 [ljz asfast.c] And just to make the point even clearer: in C, braces define a new scope
| | | | | | + 63164 [ahoward fsl.] this is precisely why i don't like that in
| | | | | |   63165 [dim colebatc] seems
| | | | | |   63166 [ahoward fsl.] perl is incredibly flexible - you can bend the barrel right around and shoot
| | | | | |   63167 [dim colebatc] that
| | | | | |   63168 [gsinclair so] You misinterpreted.  This discussion is about exporting specified
| | | | | |   63169 [dim colebatc] seems
| | | | | + 63204 [martindemell] That is almost precisely the reason I like the change - it lets you
| | | | + 63194 [kjana dm4lab] # until here, there's no foo.
| | | | | 63199 [matz ruby-la] Yes.  You will need to introduce block local variables explicitly, for
| | | | + 63756 [dblack candl] I know I'm joining this thread rather late, but I have a minority
| | | |   + 63760 [pbrannan atd] Just to be clear, I think what we want is the ability to write blocks
| | | |   + 63803 [B.Candler po] (a) make _all_ assignments in blocks block-local; that would make it
| | | |     + 63804 [dblack candl] Yes, I was expressing concern about precisely that effect :-)
| | | |     | + 63819 [B.Candler po] i = 0
| | | |     | | + 63821 [decoux moulo] How many def have you written in ruby which has a "big gap" ?
| | | |     | | + 63847 [dblack candl] But the whole idea of a 'throw-away' name is that you *know* (because
| | | |     | |   63849 [bob.news gmx] <dblack@candle.superlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| | | |     | + 63820 [B.Candler po] I had another thought. It would be wonderfully consistent if *all* variables
| | | |     + 63823 [bob.news gmx] "Brian Candler" <B.Candler@pobox.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| | | |     + 63828 [batsman.geo ] Some sugar?
| | | + 63135 [rpav nwlink.] OK, this may seem an odd set of quotes, but I have a question.  What
| | |   63145 [ahoward fsl.] 'export x'
| | + 63104 [pbrannan atd] def foo(&block); block.call; end
| | | 63117 [matz ruby-la] No.  The role of idenfiers are fixed at compile time by appearance
| | + 63121 [martindemell] I like this - I find myself defining a variable simply so that it'll
| | + 63196 [bob.news gmx] Just to make sure: From what I read in this thread there are quite some
| |   63200 [matz ruby-la] Describe your feeling and ideas.  This is why I post.  What kind of
| |   + 63213 [ahoward fsl.] please also see prior threads.
| |   | 63262 [matz ruby-la] I've read "export" stuff.  But it's a matter of policy.
| |   | 63271 [ahoward fsl.] i expect you have thought about this more than i.
| |   + 63320 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | 63335 [matz ruby-la] But these "most languages" have declaration.  So Ruby can (and does)
| |   | 63352 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | + 63354 [matz ruby-la] Unfortunately, wrong, even in the current behavior.
| |   | | + 63362 [ahoward fsl.] to clarify (for my sake), vairables are _always_ resolved lexically and _never_
| |   | | | 63395 [matz ruby-la] Yes.  Variables defined in eval() can only be seen from eval().
| |   | | + 63551 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | |   63552 [matz ruby-la] You're correct.  Thank you for taking time to understand me.
| |   | |   63558 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | |   63560 [matz ruby-la] nil.  Right again. ;-)
| |   | |   + 63564 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | |   + 63568 [ichimal feni] I think, it should be a first-class special value like #<non-initialized>.
| |   | |     63569 [matz ruby-la] Hmm, "nil" is a special value for uninitialized slot.
| |   | |     63570 [ichimal feni] If #<non-initialized> were newly established, what value can I get from
| |   | |     + 63578 [bob.news gmx] <ichimal@fenix.ne.jp> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   | |     + 63585 [matz ruby-la] I don't know, because I see no need for new #<non-initialized>.
| |   | |       + 63587 [ichimal feni] nil and false.
| |   | |       | 63590 [matz ruby-la] Hmm, do you mean #<non-initialized> value should be true?
| |   | |       | 63634 [ichimal feni] What's #<undef> in R5RS?
| |   | |       | 63638 [matz ruby-la] Yes.
| |   | |       | 63663 [ichimal feni] In Scheme, unspecific value is just (implement depend) unspecific value.
| |   | |       | 63669 [matz ruby-la] Hmm, this is interesting issue.  If you're OK, shall we discuss at the
| |   | |       | 63746 [ichimal feni] I'm Okay.
| |   | |       | 63748 [matz ruby-la] OK, let's move.  Honestly, it's kinda hard for me to discuss.
| |   | |       + 63588 [transami tra] this is akin to NACK but for variables instead of methods (?), see Ruby mail
| |   | |         63595 [ahoward fsl.] the entire idea of a non-initialized variable is impossible without separate
| |   | |         63596 [transami tra] puts x  #--> undefined local variable or method 'x' for....
| |   | |         63612 [ahoward fsl.] wasn't directly solely at you! ;-)  just thought i'd point that out!
| |   | + 63366 [batsman.geo ] You can write
| |   + 63370 [batsman.geo ] I think I preferred the solution with ':='. Even though I was reluctant
| + 63096 [ahoward fsl.] elimnating methods is _very_ important to keep things fast too, not just to
|   63105 [pbrannan atd] From what I've seen, the Ruby Way to make things fast seems to be to
+ 63088 [bob.news gmx] Hm, don't know. I can see the benefits but personally I prefer it the other
threads.html
top