86071-87020 subjects 86418-88469

^ OT: A newbie query about Soap4R and dot net web services
86290 [SchmittR t-s] Perhaps you can give me another mail adress?

^ [RCR] Kernel#hostname
86293 [ahoward ngdc] having to include 'socket' only to do 'Socket.gethostname' definitely is not
86307 [djberge qwes] On some platforms (Solaris) you have to link against -lsocket anyway on

^ portable UUID/GUID generation?
86302 [lists zara.6] Is there one? Haven't found anything suitable on RAA. I need to generate
86316 [lists zara.6] To change my question into another. I just finished writing a Uuid class

^ Class#inherited, class definition and industry.
86303 [cez necrofis] ...
86491 [nobu.nokada ] Yes.  The end of definition cannot be determined in Ruby.

^ open-uri and basic http authentication
86306 [culley fastm] Can open-uri be used to access a page protected by basic http
86329 [akr m17n.org] No.

^ [ann] regexp-engine 0.4
86308 [neoneye adsl] Try it out; tell me your opinion.

^ ThreadError w/WEBrick
86309 [nathaniel NO] I have a WEBrick server that runs fine for over three days, and then starts
86354 [nathaniel NO] - As far as I can tell, the only place thread.rb line 276 gets called is
86355 [decoux moulo] ...
86357 [nathaniel NO] Interesting... so, if calling Thread#stop causes an error, why is it called
86358 [nathaniel NO] <slaps forehead> Ah, I see... Thread.stop raises an error if it is called

^ Range does not take an Range object.
86310 [greentea fa2] Range#include? does not take a Range object. It is strange for me.
+ 86321 [djd15 po.cwr] class Range
| 86323 [djd15 po.cwr] Oops, that's slightly broken.  Here's a fix.
| 86332 [Peter.Vanbro] Doesn't work for ranges like 'a'..'z'. If I understand well, the only
| 86334 [Peter.Vanbro] lb1 = first
+ 86454 [greentea fa2] I am happy that there were at least three persons (included me) who
  86456 [Peter.Vanbro] It should indeed really be built in, because the presence of exclude_end?

^ command line editing in irb under MSYS
86313 [vjoel PATH.B] Has anyone been able to get irb to work nicely under MSYS? And 'irb -r
86314 [vjoel PATH.B] I got that last bit backwards: MSYS translates paths _except_ when the

^ [OT] For science fiction fans...
86320 [hal9000 hype] For those who care about such things, I have a short story
+ 86322 [transami run] Nice Hal.
| 86337 [hal9000 hype] Actually, I have no idea what was going on behind the scenes. I figured
| 86339 [joey joeygib] And on Laurie Anderson's first record, United States Live (actually _4_
| 86359 [rasputin ido] Edison was also responsible for electric chairs running on A/C, according to
+ 86328 [surrender_it] cool, strangely enough this is not the first time I read some
  86338 [hal9000 hype] I do indeed, usually called "Meg." She's the brains of the

^ Question about finalizers for extension objects
86324 [lyle users.s] I'm trying to debug an FXRuby-related problem that only occurs when the
86341 [decoux moulo] ...

^ exceptions in tk after procs?
86326 [ferenc engar] There are a few situations when ruby code runs in a way that the raised
86478 [nagai ai.kyu] TkAfter had a bug on treatment of TkAfter#cancel_on_exception=(mode).
86714 [ferenc engar] Why? :)
86768 [nagai ai.kyu] Similar to threads.
+ 86792 [ferenc engar] And what about, say, TkEntry's validatecommand functions? It seems that
| 86847 [nagai ai.kyu] Which version of tcltklib do you use?
+ 87055 [ferenc engar] Oh, I have missed the TkCore's after and after_idle methods. Why did I

^ [ANN] Syck 0.42 -- Major buffering bugfix
86333 [yaml-core wh] Rich Kilmer reported an issue with recent versions of Syck.  A YAML document

^ libgphoto2 binding
86336 [cyclists nc.] I'm thinking about doing a binding for libgphoto2, the library behind
86348 [lrz gnome.or] This is a good idea.

^ RubyConf 2003 pictures posted
86340 [bystr mac.co] Finally, I got to my camera and had a chance to post some conference

^ graden wiki <code> tag too small
86342 [transami run] I was using <b> tags to distinguish inline code, then realized I should be
86351 [chad chadfow] # I was using <b> tags to distinguish inline code, then realized I should be

^ Backtrace without skips needed
86343 [tpeters inva] Is there a way to tell ruby that it must never skip levels in the
+ 86352 [matz ruby-la] begin
| 86364 [hgs dmu.ac.u] I, for one, won't remember this when I need it, so may I suggest
+ 86353 [nathaniel NO] See http://www.ruby-talk.org/75008 and following. Basically it comes down
+ 86367 [zoranlazarev] You might want to enclose your 'main' into begin/rescue/end and print
| 86368 [bob.news gmx] "Zoran Lazarevic" <zoranlazarevic@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 86379 [tpeters inva] Thank you for your replies.
| 86387 [bob.news gmx] "Tobias Peters" <tpeters@invalid.uni-oldenburg.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| 86444 [matz ruby-la] I'd say "no" to the rc idea.  I believe it's application matter, not
| 86477 [bob.news gmx] "Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz@ruby-lang.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 86465 [gsinclair so] If you catch the exception ('err') and 'puts err.backtrace', you'll

^ Re: Controlled block variables
86344 [transami run] Then why isn't it being ignored on core? D.N.C.
+ 86346 [decoux moulo] ...
| + 86347 [transami run] No and Always.
| | + 86349 [pit capitain] maybe you can make use of "define_method" as in
| | | 86543 [transami run] I'll respond here to keep core as prestine as some seem to want it to be.
| | | + 86545 [gsinclair so] class X
| | | | 86548 [transami run] Ooops. You're right, not nil, rather unknown. I was thinking @a, which would
| | | + 86652 [pit capitain] I thought you could tell from my examples, but let's try it with your
| | |   86693 [transami run] Okay, I think I know what you're saying. So you're defining a method for the
| | |   + 86698 [nobu.nokada ] class_eval "define_method " # a comment
| | |   | 86700 [transami run] Thanks for the fix! :-)
| | |   + 86732 [pit capitain] That's more or less what I did in my first post. But I think you still
| | |     86736 [transami run] Yes, your right, I had "blinders on" and really was missing your point.
| | |     86895 [transami run] Hey Capitain,
| | |     86951 [pit capitain] As far as I can tell from your replies, I think you understood what I
| | + 86350 [chad chadfow] #
| |   86356 [transami run] Understood. So I will set the record straight for all to bare.
| + 86370 [transami run] <quote source="ruby-talk:86133">
|   86372 [decoux moulo] ...
|   86385 [transami run] So we should throw an error instead?  I say we don't even need the warning.
|   86389 [decoux moulo] ...
|   86397 [transami run] First, small problem
|   86400 [decoux moulo] ...
|   86416 [transami run] Let's see... non POLS, double semantic meaning...
+ 86369 [djd15 po.cwr] I actually have wondered in the past why there isn't an #eval that takes
  + 86376 [dblack wobbl] I can see what you're getting at, but I don't agree that it's clean,
  | 86380 [djd15 po.cwr] Actually, I meant that the way of specifying that you want dynamic
  + 86390 [transami run] this is an interesting means of code evaluation. essentially encapsulating
    + 86403 [dagbrown LAR] ...
    | 86419 [transami run] You know I actually just noticed that the other day. And to be honest I would
    + 86432 [djd15 po.cwr] This was discussed over the summer as I recall.  It opens up a whole can
      86544 [transami run] I see. And I'll check the archives to learn more (although that search
      + 86546 [gsinclair so] On http://ruby-doc.org, you can find a link to "Ruby Eye for the Python
      | 86553 [transami run] Thanks Gavin. I read it over. And I certainly understand the distinction. To
      | 86562 [gsinclair so] Maybe.  It could return a String, nil, a FroBoz, anything really.
      | 86580 [transami run] Like I said, I may be overlooking something obvious here, but what i mean is
      | + 86597 [gsinclair so] It's not faking anything, though.  e.ameth is a callable object (it
      | | 86598 [transami run] Sure, I understand. I'm just wonder if it can be done. Hence my original
      | | 86631 [hal9000 hype] The () notation seems to make sense for a variable that happens
      | | 86644 [transami run] yes, weird errors. that's a big minus.
      | + 86600 [uu9r stud.un] What's wrong with
      + 86565 [dagbrown LAR] ...

^ turning a string into array of ASCII bytes
86360 [lists zara.6] What is the shortest, most straightforward way (without temporary
+ 86361 [Peter.Vanbro] irb(main):003:0> "1234".unpack("c*")
| + 86362 [lists zara.6] Of course. I forgot all about pack/unpack.
| + 86363 [neoneye adsl] ["78", "79", "7a"]
+ 86375 [stesch no-sp] Do you really need an array? You can access the ASCII codes of every
  86381 [markjreed ma] Currently, that's so.  However, I believe that such behavior is due to
  + 86388 [bob.news gmx] "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@mail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
  | 86393 [transami run] or
  | + 86405 [bob.news gmx] "T. Onoma" <transami@runbox.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
  | + 86427 [ahoward ngdc] you mean this?
  + 86404 [stesch no-sp] Who wants to use such a language? I don't want to rewrite my code
    86410 [markjreed ma] You don't have to.  Ruby has evolved relatively slowly, and

^ Stupid Question #498 - How do I move a directory?
86365 [Paul.Allton ] ...
86371 [surrender_it] FileUtils.move dir1 dir2 seemto work for mw on winxp.
86377 [djberge qwes] That means there was something wrong with your choice of file names
86394 [Paul.Allton ] FileTest.exist?(old)     #>   true
86396 [decoux moulo] ...

^ REXML XML Schema Data Types
86366 [schlegel cs.] ...
86450 [jamesUNDERBA] I beleive Sean is considering (or maybe working on) adding RELAX NG

^ another stupid question: filling out webforms
86374 [xschmidix gm] i?d like to fill out a html webform with ruby with randomly generated
+ 86378 [rodrigo.berm] Try this...
| 86402 [xschmidix gm] thx for helping me!
+ 86426 [ahoward ngdc] ~/eg/ruby/http > lynx -source http://www.mypage.com/webform.html

^ Date Class and GMT
86382 [zdennis mkte] irb(main):001:0> Time.now
86383 [markjreed ma] (You should have deleted the "UTC" from that, since it refers to the
+ 86384 [markjreed ma] Oh, it turns out that instead of using DateTime, you can just use the %z
| 86386 [zdennis mkte] Thank you very much Mark!
+ 90063 [tadf rc5.so-] I've just read your mail.  I don't read nearly all discussions in

^ Method wrapping
86391 [hal9000 hype] I've come late into the thread on this, and I haven't read all
+ 86392 [decoux moulo] ...
| 86401 [hal9000 hype] OK, I thought maybe it was defined on the core list (which
| 86417 [transami run] You ain't miss'n much ;-)
+ 86438 [pbrannan atd] IIRC (and if my notes are accurate), I think Matz indicated in his talk
| 86453 [sdate everes] ...
+ 86445 [matz ruby-la] He might have his own version of Ruby with method combination, it's my
  + 86446 [Peter.Vanbro] Will it also be possible to redefine wrapper methods? (I believe that's
  | 86448 [Peter.Vanbro] ... since they stack _and_ since are anonymous in a sense. If there are 5
  | + 86464 [matz ruby-la] Basically.  I think I will prepare method handling API to operate on
  | | 86489 [Peter.Vanbro] Just a stupid question, but wouldn't it be cleanest conceptually if a
  | + 86466 [gsinclair so] Sounds like "wrap and live with it", which is OK by me.
  + 86452 [chr_mail gmx] Will it be possible to manipulate this stack? Like
  | 86463 [matz ruby-la] It will.  But API is not yet designed.
  + 86457 [hal9000 hype] Of course.
  | + 86462 [matz ruby-la] They are auxiliary methods.  And "no", you can't "redefine" those
  | | + 86470 [transami run] I don't think that's a desirable behavior. See previous post.
  | | | + 86472 [gsinclair so] If you are redefining your own method in development, you know what
  | | | | + 86473 [transami run] Since we are discussing the addition of AOP features to the core language, I
  | | | | | + 86475 [beast system] OK, I'll add my take from the perspective of someone that's not played
  | | | | | | 86479 [transami run] It is rather odd. Aspect Oriented Programming is still rather new and I thnk
  | | | | | + 86476 [transami run] I forgot to add that if you are not redefining, then your adding an additional
  | | | | | + 86516 [transami run] Actually I have rethought this. Wrappers do depend on the implementation b/c
  | | | | |   86522 [jweirich one] The distinction between *what* and *kind* alludes me for the moment.
  | | | | + 86474 [transami run] Oh, and Gavin,
  | | | |   86485 [gsinclair so] Thanks, but there ain't no thanksgiving down here! :)
  | | | + 86481 [matz ruby-la] Which one?  We have too many "previous" posts here.
  | | |   86484 [transami run] the "right before this one" kind of previous ;-)
  | | |   86490 [matz ruby-la] No.  But I prefer identity by X-Mail-Count (for example, I'm replying
  | | |   86521 [charleshixsn] FWIW,
  | | |   86528 [matz ruby-la] I do understand the situation, it's same for me.  But still I need
  | | + 86493 [chr_mail gmx] I have asked the same this question as well and I really wish
  | |   86498 [Peter.Vanbro] I think Matz's way is the best compromise. Besides, if you only add
  | |   + 86508 [chr_mail gmx] This sound all good and well however this does not change the
  | |   | 86512 [Peter.Vanbro] If the arity goes up, you can avoid problems provided the first arguments
  | |   | 86518 [chr_mail gmx] You realize that you on are speculative grounds claiming that
  | |   | + 86524 [Peter.Vanbro] def meth:wrap(a,b,*args)
  | |   | | 86535 [chr_mail gmx] This will probably be illegal since wrapper arity differs from
  | |   | | 86536 [Peter.Vanbro] Oh... Is there any specific reason for that? But now you got me wondering,
  | |   | | 86537 [chr_mail gmx] That was my reading of Matz announcement at least for
  | |   | | + 86538 [Peter.Vanbro] def foo(a,b,c=3)
  | |   | | | 86540 [chr_mail gmx] I sort of suggested the latter possibility but judging from
  | |   | | + 86542 [matz ruby-la] I didn't say anything about arity matching of method combination.
  | |   | + 86529 [transami run] Also redefining the primary method means you have to know what the next hook
  | |   |   86530 [Peter.Vanbro] I think I see the cause of the misunderstanding... Your use of method
  | |   |   86547 [transami run] I see. Yes, that was one of the things I was trying to convey. I've read a bit
  | |   |   86551 [Peter.Vanbro] When I was listening to their tutorial, my feeling was that they kept
  | |   + 86511 [transami run] I can understand where you're coming from with this. You want the
  | |     86517 [Peter.Vanbro] What are wrappers going to be used for? Are you only supposed to add
  | |     86523 [transami run] Maybe your misunderstanding me (or vice-versa)? B/C I basically agree with
  | |     86527 [Peter.Vanbro] That would be ideal, but my point was that I don't see how you are going
  | + 86468 [transami run] I doubt we should be able to redine secondary methods. If you do this they
  + 86469 [transami run] I would like to point out that their is some inconsistentcy in this behavior,
    + 86482 [matz ruby-la] class A < X
    | 86487 [transami run] Nope. With your example, A#riot no longer calls back to X. This is not what I
    + 86492 [dblack wobbl] It's not really different behavior on the part of def.  def always

^ TCP/IP in Ruby
86395 [BCoish Dymax] I've run into a problem that I'm hoping is not unique.
86421 [jjh-ruby-tal] The original code doesn't work on a Linux machine either.  Here's
86455 [BCoish Dymax] First, thanks for the speedy response!
87025 [jjh-ruby-tal] Sorry for taking so long to reply.
87056 [coish hfx.ea] Thanks for the reply!  Unfortunately flushing the socket seems to have

^ Re: Ruby thread problems
86398 [BCoish Dymax] Thanks for the speedy reply, sorry took so long to get back to you.  I've
86486 [decoux moulo] ...
86507 [BCoish Dymax] Mr. Decoux,

^ Dumb str.sub question
86399 [orion2480 ho] I feel really dumb asking this, but I just can't seem to figure it out.
+ 86407 [markjreed ma] Because of the extra processing that substution strings undergo.  Within
| 86422 [mike ratdog.] ...
| 86425 [markjreed ma] Good point.  I generally make a habit of using single quotes when
+ 86409 [austin halos] str = "isn't stands for is not"

^ Library directory structure on windows
86406 [Gavri_F info] i'm trying to understand the significance of the subdirectories of lib, but i don't understand what each of them are for
86441 [gsinclair so] Ruby "standard libraries" go here.  benchmark, cgi, test/unit, ...
86510 [Gavri_F info] thanks gavin. there *is* an installer.

^ defining a 'puts' or a 'print' for a class
86408 [zdennis mkte] class Email
+ 86411 [markjreed ma] Define a 'to_s' method.
| + 86412 [Gavri_F info] if you actually meant
| | 86414 [zdennis mkte] Thanks Gavri!
| + 86413 [zdennis mkte] Thanks again Mark!
+ 86415 [dmartenson m] class Email
  86420 [zdennis mkte] It would and it does. Thanks Dale for your response!