86290-90063

86071-87020 subjects 86418-88469

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

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

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

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

open-uri and basic http authentication
86306 [culley@fa tm] Can open-uri be used to access a page protected by basic http
86329 [akr@m1 n. rg] No.

[ann] regexp-engine 0.4
86308 [neoneye@ad l] 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@mo lo] svg% ruby -e 'Thread.new { Thread.stop }'
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@fa ] Range#include? does not take a Range object. It is strange for me.
+ 86321 [djd15@po cw ] class Range
| 86323 [djd15@po cw ] 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@fa ] 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@PA H. ] Has anyone been able to get irb to work nicely under MSYS? And 'irb -r
86314 [vjoel@PA H. ] I got that last bit backwards: MSYS translates paths _except_ when the

[OT] For science fiction fans...
86320 [hal9000@hy e] For those who care about such things, I have a short story
+ 86322 [transami@ru ] Nice Hal.
| 86337 [hal9000@hy e] Actually, I have no idea what was going on behind the scenes. I figured
| 86339 [joey@jo yg b] And on Laurie Anderson's first record, United States Live (actually _4_
| 86359 [rasputin@id ] 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@hy e] I do indeed, usually called "Meg." She's the brains of the

Question about finalizers for extension objects
86324 [lyle@us rs s] I'm trying to debug an FXRuby-related problem that only occurs when the
86341 [decoux@mo lo] No, you can't predict in which order will run the finalizer (except if you

exceptions in tk after procs?
86326 [ferenc@en ar] There are a few situations when ruby code runs in a way that the raised
86478 [nagai@ai ky ] TkAfter had a bug on treatment of TkAfter#cancel_on_exception=(mode).
86714 [ferenc@en ar] Why? :)
86768 [nagai@ai ky ] Similar to threads.
+ 86792 [ferenc@en ar] And what about, say, TkEntry's validatecommand functions? It seems that
| 86847 [nagai@ai ky ] Which version of tcltklib do you use?
+ 87055 [ferenc@en ar] 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@gn me or] This is a good idea.

RubyConf 2003 pictures posted
86340 [bystr@ma .c ] Finally, I got to my camera and had a chance to post some conference

graden wiki <code> tag too small
86342 [transami@ru ] I was using <b> tags to distinguish inline code, then realized I should be
86351 [chad@ch df w] # I was using <b> tags to distinguish inline code, then realized I should be

Backtrace without skips needed
86343 [tpeters@in a] Is there a way to tell ruby that it must never skip levels in the
+ 86352 [matz@ru y- a] begin
| 86364 [hgs@dm .a .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@gm ] "Zoran Lazarevic" <zoranlazarevic@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 86379 [tpeters@in a] Thank you for your replies.
| 86387 [bob.news@gm ] "Tobias Peters" <tpeters@invalid.uni-oldenburg.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| 86444 [matz@ru y- a] I'd say "no" to the rc idea.  I believe it's application matter, not
| 86477 [bob.news@gm ] "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@ru ] Then why isn't it being ignored on core? D.N.C.
+ 86346 [decoux@mo lo] You want to change this
| + 86347 [transami@ru ] No and Always.
| | + 86349 [pit@ca it in] maybe you can make use of "define_method" as in
| | | 86543 [transami@ru ] I'll respond here to keep core as prestine as some seem to want it to be.
| | | + 86545 [gsinclair@so] class X
| | | | 86548 [transami@ru ] Ooops. You're right, not nil, rather unknown. I was thinking @a, which would
| | | + 86652 [pit@ca it in] I thought you could tell from my examples, but let's try it with your
| | |   86693 [transami@ru ] 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@ru ] Thanks for the fix! :-)
| | |   + 86732 [pit@ca it in] That's more or less what I did in my first post. But I think you still
| | |     86736 [transami@ru ] Yes, your right, I had "blinders on" and really was missing your point.
| | |     86895 [transami@ru ] Hey Capitain,
| | |     86951 [pit@ca it in] As far as I can tell from your replies, I think you understood what I
| | + 86350 [chad@ch df w] #
| |   86356 [transami@ru ] Understood. So I will set the record straight for all to bare.
| + 86370 [transami@ru ] <quote source="ruby-talk:86133">
|   86372 [decoux@mo lo] svg% ruby -w
|   86385 [transami@ru ] So we should throw an error instead?  I say we don't even need the warning.
|   86389 [decoux@mo lo] Which problems ?
|   86397 [transami@ru ] First, small problem
|   86400 [decoux@mo lo] only print "rabbit"
|   86416 [transami@ru ] Let's see... non POLS, double semantic meaning...
+ 86369 [djd15@po cw ] I actually have wondered in the past why there isn't an #eval that takes
  + 86376 [dblack@wo bl] I can see what you're getting at, but I don't agree that it's clean,
  | 86380 [djd15@po cw ] Actually, I meant that the way of specifying that you want dynamic
  + 86390 [transami@ru ] this is an interesting means of code evaluation. essentially encapsulating
    + 86403 [dagbrown@LA ] p[a,b] will do as you expect.  Proc#[] actually calls the code in
    | 86419 [transami@ru ] You know I actually just noticed that the other day. And to be honest I would
    + 86432 [djd15@po cw ] This was discussed over the summer as I recall.  It opens up a whole can
      86544 [transami@ru ] 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@ru ] 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@ru ] 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@ru ] Sure, I understand. I'm just wonder if it can be done. Hence my original
      | | 86631 [hal9000@hy e] The () notation seems to make sense for a variable that happens
      | | 86644 [transami@ru ] yes, weird errors. that's a big minus.
      | + 86600 [uu9r@st d. n] What's wrong with
      + 86565 [dagbrown@LA ] class MyClass

turning a string into array of ASCII bytes
86360 [lists@za a. ] What is the shortest, most straightforward way (without temporary
+ 86361 [Peter.Vanbro] irb(main):003:0> "1234".unpack("c*")
| + 86362 [lists@za a. ] Of course. I forgot all about pack/unpack.
| + 86363 [neoneye@ad l] ["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@gm ] "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@mail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
  | 86393 [transami@ru ] or
  | + 86405 [bob.news@gm ] "T. Onoma" <transami@runbox.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
  | + 86427 [ahoward@ng c] 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@qw s] That means there was something wrong with your choice of file names
86394 [Paul.Allton@] FileTest.exist?(old)     #>   true
86396 [decoux@mo lo] # ...

REXML XML Schema Data Types
86366 [schlegel@cs ] Thanks to Sean about REXML it realy does a fine job.
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@ng c] ~/eg/ruby/http > lynx -source http://www.mypage.com/webform.html

Date Class and GMT
86382 [zdennis@mk e] 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@mk e] Thank you very much Mark!
+ 90063 [tadf@rc .s -] I've just read your mail.  I don't read nearly all discussions in

Method wrapping
86391 [hal9000@hy e] I've come late into the thread on this, and I haven't read all
+ 86392 [decoux@mo lo] Only matz know the response to these questions.
| 86401 [hal9000@hy e] OK, I thought maybe it was defined on the core list (which
| 86417 [transami@ru ] You ain't miss'n much ;-)
+ 86438 [pbrannan@at ] IIRC (and if my notes are accurate), I think Matz indicated in his talk
| 86453 [sdate@ev re ] Judging from that one occasion when I was sitting next to you,
+ 86445 [matz@ru y- a] 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@ru y- a] 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@gm ] Will it be possible to manipulate this stack? Like
  | 86463 [matz@ru y- a] It will.  But API is not yet designed.
  + 86457 [hal9000@hy e] Of course.
  | + 86462 [matz@ru y- a] They are auxiliary methods.  And "no", you can't "redefine" those
  | | + 86470 [transami@ru ] 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@ru ] Since we are discussing the addition of AOP features to the core language, I
  | | | | | + 86475 [beast@sy te ] OK, I'll add my take from the perspective of someone that's not played
  | | | | | | 86479 [transami@ru ] It is rather odd. Aspect Oriented Programming is still rather new and I thnk
  | | | | | + 86476 [transami@ru ] I forgot to add that if you are not redefining, then your adding an additional
  | | | | | + 86516 [transami@ru ] Actually I have rethought this. Wrappers do depend on the implementation b/c
  | | | | |   86522 [jweirich@on ] The distinction between *what* and *kind* alludes me for the moment.
  | | | | + 86474 [transami@ru ] Oh, and Gavin,
  | | | |   86485 [gsinclair@so] Thanks, but there ain't no thanksgiving down here! :)
  | | | + 86481 [matz@ru y- a] Which one?  We have too many "previous" posts here.
  | | |   86484 [transami@ru ] the "right before this one" kind of previous ;-)
  | | |   86490 [matz@ru y- a] No.  But I prefer identity by X-Mail-Count (for example, I'm replying
  | | |   86521 [charleshixsn] FWIW,
  | | |   86528 [matz@ru y- a] I do understand the situation, it's same for me.  But still I need
  | | + 86493 [chr_mail@gm ] 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@gm ] 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@gm ] You realize that you on are speculative grounds claiming that
  | |   | + 86524 [Peter.Vanbro] def meth:wrap(a,b,*args)
  | |   | | 86535 [chr_mail@gm ] 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@gm ] That was my reading of Matz announcement at least for
  | |   | | + 86538 [Peter.Vanbro] def foo(a,b,c=3)
  | |   | | | 86540 [chr_mail@gm ] I sort of suggested the latter possibility but judging from
  | |   | | + 86542 [matz@ru y- a] I didn't say anything about arity matching of method combination.
  | |   | + 86529 [transami@ru ] 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@ru ] 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@ru ] 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@ru ] 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@ru ] I doubt we should be able to redine secondary methods. If you do this they
  + 86469 [transami@ru ] I would like to point out that their is some inconsistentcy in this behavior,
    + 86482 [matz@ru y- a] class A < X
    | 86487 [transami@ru ] Nope. With your example, A#riot no longer calls back to X. This is not what I
    + 86492 [dblack@wo bl] It's not really different behavior on the part of def.  def always

TCP/IP in Ruby
86395 [BCoish@Dy ax] 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@Dy ax] First, thanks for the speedy response!
87025 [jjh-ruby-tal] Sorry for taking so long to reply.
87056 [coish@hf .e ] Thanks for the reply!  Unfortunately flushing the socket seems to have

Re: Ruby thread problems
86398 [BCoish@Dy ax] Thanks for the speedy reply, sorry took so long to get back to you.  I've
86486 [decoux@mo lo] longjmp restore the stack registers (%esp on 80x86), not the stack content.
86507 [BCoish@Dy ax] 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@ra do .] Sometimes it is useful to pick your quotes carefully e.g.
| 86425 [markjreed@ma] Good point.  I generally make a habit of using single quotes when
+ 86409 [austin@ha os] str = "isn't stands for is not"

Library directory structure on windows
86406 [Gavri_F@in o] 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@in o] thanks gavin. there *is* an installer.

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