87673-88154

87432-88279 subjects 87907-88715

expect, rexpect and others
87673 [bg-rubytalk@] I know that now Ruby includes "expect", and that's great, however I noticed

Finding Software, prenatal projects at RubyForge (Was: format money)
87674 [ jupp@gm .d ] Rubyforge has an RSS feed with a list of all projects. RAA could use
87711 [tom@in oe he] Yup - http://rubyforge.org/export/rss_sfprojects.php
87714 [hal9000@hy e] Well, maybe they could be marked inactive in some way. When they
87716 [tom@in oe he] Hm, that's an good idea.  Might be a tricky bit trying to figure out
+ 87721 [hal9000@hy e] Personally I'd be conservative with it -- mark it inactive if it
+ 87732 [surrender_it] well.. how's the 'most active projects' stuff working?
  87828 [tom@in oe he] There's a formula buried somewhere in the GForge code with a bunch of
  87842 [gsinclair@so] It's pretty inscrutable.  I think the developers must have just been
  87863 [tom@in oe he] Nah, no problem at all so far.

nuby question re a method
87680 [vanjac12@ya ] I am new to ruby, and have a simple question.
87682 [markjreed@ma] Actually, an instance of the AddressBook class *contains* an array of persons
87683 [david.naseby] There's some precedence difference between do..end and {}, but semantically
87776 [vanjac12@ya ] Thanks for both responses. In particular for the syntax error.

Why can't I get ruby 'extras' to just plain work?!
87681 [rich@li hi o] I'm getting really frustrated.
87694 [rasputin@id ] Do you get errors? What are they?

Re: yaml load error
87684 [ahoward@ng c] hate to follow up on my own post, but the problem is that the line

Request for comments (longish)
87691 [luke@ma st p] ...
87696 [dblack@wo bl] I don't think it matters, except that it might be a little faster with
+ 87697 [dblack@wo bl] Whoops, |h,k| would make more sense as it's the Hash object itself
+ 87699 [gsinclair@so] Love that trick.  Here's how I initialized a hash recently.  (The
+ 87708 [luke@ma st p] Thanks for your comments.

new free usenet server
87698 [raderack@te ] New Free usenet server at: ezard.ma.cx  port:8009

ruby 1.8.0: Error on "%02d" % "08" or "%02d" % "09"
87701 [samul@we .d ] I'm using ruby 1.8.0 (Win native and cygwin version). These two commands
+ 87703 [decoux@mo lo] it think that you are trying to give it an octal number, try
+ 87707 [austin@ha os] irb(main):003:0> "%02d" % 08
  87709 [samul@we .d ] Your example is different as the second argument is not a string --

Docs for Socket, OpenSSL, etc
87706 [jfh@ci e. fl] Are there any plans to add docs for modules like Socket and OpenSSL, etc to
+ 87724 [surrender_it] www.ruby-doc.org may help. It has many documentation available.
+ 87762 [gsinclair@so] I have plans to put them in the latter, but those are very long-term
| 87772 [jfh@ci e. fl] Ok, I've added a tiny blurb for UNIXServer::accept, and I see it show up in
| 87773 [jfh@ci e. fl] *smack* duhhh...
| 87777 [gsinclair@so] # I think you're double posting to ruby-talk.
| 87778 [decoux@mo lo] grep _s_open io.c
+ 87766 [neoneye@ad l] Don't know...
  87769 [jfh@ci e. fl] I found that too, but I'd rather not have to dig around for docs, especially
  87780 [dave@pr gp o] Hold off for just a week or two: RDoc might change just slightly as I
  87781 [jfh@ci e. fl] KO...let me know when to start back up.
  87798 [dave@pr gp o] In the meantime, I assume you've looked at

Ruby -Word2002-XML
87715 [usenets@ya o] I have a word 2002 document with a table in it. Is there a way of using ruby
+ 87735 [james@ru yx ] Well, the short answer is "Yes."  You can use WIN32OLE to create an
+ 87739 [ jupp@gm .d ] I don't use Word 2002 (perhaps it is not available for Linux?) but I

License policy for RubyOperatingSystem
87718 [neoneye@ad l] We are planning to make a Ruby Operating System (ROS),
87944 [maillist@be ] Make it was same as ruby.
88015 [neoneye@ad l] That were also my initial idea, but as Shasckaw points out,

How to unit test finalizers?
87719 [samuel@th ug] That's fine.  I'm guessing that the GC will eventually, most likely,
+ 87753 [matz@ru y- a] How about not relying on finalizers, i.e. separate finalizing process
| + 87826 [samuel@th ug] Oh, right on.  I had my thoughts so narrowly focused that didn't even
| + 87910 [pbrannan@at ] While it is your responsibility to call the finalizers, it is our
|   87914 [neoneye@ad l] Wouldn't it be possible to spawn a child process, where a instance outputs
|   + 87943 [sera@fh an .] One of the things you run into when you try doing things like this is
|   | 87977 [neoneye@ad l] You misunderstand what I am saying.
|   + 88016 [pbrannan@at ] This only guarantees that the finalizer was registered properly with the
+ 87760 [sera@fh an .] I never solved this one, myself. I just ended up having the finalizer
  87810 [drbrain@se m] The problem Samuel (and myself) are working on falls outside this

rexml, rbbr, ruby-mysql, and exerb errors (was: Re: Why can't I get ruby 'extras' to just plain work?!)
87728 [rich@li hi o] "D:\rubyMine\rexml\tests>ruby include.rb
+ 87736 [tksano@m3 kc] I have no answer to the rest of your problems, but
| 87742 [rich@li hi o] Awesome - I'll try and wait for the 3.0.0 release then
| 87746 [tksano@m3 kc] I'm not the author, so I don't know. But you can use exerb
+ 87797 [mutoh@hi hw ] 1. Re-install rbbr.

race condition in makedirs
87730 [vjoel@PA H. ] In the ftools.rb implementation of File.makedirs (ruby 1.8.1-preview3),

[Q] Fast loading of BIG data structures
87737 [slumos@ya oo] Features = [
+ 87738 [dcarrera@ma ] Try PStore.
| 87741 [vjoel@PA H. ] ... using Marshal, which the OP found less efficient :(
+ 87740 [transami@ru ] Curious. What kind of machine are you running this on? These times seem a bit
| 87832 [slumos@ya oo] That was on a Blade 2000, but the timing for the require case is
+ 87743 [billk@ct .c ] On the off-chance it's something about the way Marshal is doing
+ 87770 [surrender_it] I suppose load should be little faster than require :)
+ 87771 [bob.news@gm ] "Steven Lumos" <slumos@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 87793 [ahoward@ng c] that's a cool idea: a code generation database
+ 87851 [ jupp@gm .d ] Special purpose C extension. Not that I recommend it in general

Re: support rfc2045,6,7 in rubymail
87763 [Pavel.Arnost] yes, encoding is what i want..

prog for g.c.d. of 2 integers
87775 [vanjac12@ya ] Topics from mathematics make good practice programs, IMO.
+ 87782 [bob.news@gm ] "Van Jacques" <vanjac12@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| + 87786 [michael_s_ca] Not trying to "golf", but is the begin/end necessary here?
| | 87790 [bob.news@gm ] "Michael Campbell" <michael_s_campbell@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| | + 87801 [michael_s_ca] Newsbeitrag
| | + 88074 [behrends@cs ] Actually, the begin/end make the above incorrect. It will break
| + 87827 [Peter.Vanbro] Actually you don't need the test since
| | 87872 [vanjac12@ya ] Good point. a % b = a if b > a . Also, I liked Robert's solution,
| | + 87899 [vanjac12@ya ] Florian Pflug writes
| | + 87906 [bob.news@gm ] "Van Jacques" <vanjac12@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| |   88069 [vanjac12@ya ] Yes, mod is not a good name. I was going to change it to gcd but never did.
| |   88118 [bob.news@gm ] "Van Jacques" <vanjac12@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| + 87884 [fgp@ph o. rg] A few remarks about the above - it's late, and i am tired, so forgive me if
+ 87852 [ jupp@gm .d ] I don't agree with that. When starting with mathematics the most
  87855 [neoneye@ad l] [snip gcd]
  87901 [ jupp@gm .d ] I don't want to manually update two locations. Chances are good that
  87902 [neoneye@ad l] Simon Strandgaard

problems with racc: $end token
87783 [luke@ma st p] I'm trying to write a simple parser using racc, and I'm apparently
87789 [jim@fr ez .o] I apologize for not being able to dig more into this, but for
87791 [luke@ma st p] Well, kind of, but we're both doing the same thing.  Most of the examples
87792 [jim@fr ez .o] What if you do: return ["", ""]  ?
87799 [luke@ma st p] I still get a syntax error, but this time the apparently-magical token
+ 87800 [jim@fr ez .o] @q.push [false, '$']   # optional from 1.3.7
| 87818 [luke@ma st p] Yep, I've tried that, along with about nine other variations of having an
| + 87820 [jim@fr ez .o] I agree. Could be a grammar/file syntax mismatch.
| + 87833 [jim@fr ez .o] I took your code and repeated the $end problem.
|   87836 [luke@ma st p] Um, wow, thank you!
|   87885 [aamine@lo er] Set @yydebug=true in your "inner" and use racc -g.
+ 87811 [luke@ma st p] Okay, I may have actually tracked this down to my apparent ignorance of
  87815 [cez@ne ro is] I had that problem a day or two ago...
  87822 [neoneye@ad l] Use '\z'  (lowercase) if you want to match the end.

ruby-dev summary 22012-22195
87784 [ksaito@ur nu] This is a summary of ruby-dev mailing list.

FastCGI ?
87787 [transami@ru ] "In a fit of stupidity, I lost the source to fastcgi for ruby.
87816 [ahoward@ng c] lynx -source http://www.codeforpeople.com/packages/ruby-fcgi-0.8.4.tar.gz

Ruby Doc Vision (was Re: Docs for Socket, OpenSSL, etc)
87803 [jfh@ci e. fl] Ack! I guess I haven't run through Pickaxe in a while ( I know, bad
+ 87812 [dave@pr gp o] The vision I'm personally moving towards is RDoc/ri integration. RDoc
| 87843 [gsinclair@so] Sounds awesome.  Thanks Dave.
+ 87846 [gsinclair@so] Jim...:->> ).
  + 87849 [dave@pr gp o] Because I may need to extend RDoc's markup slightly to help it get more
  + 87854 [lewisd@f0 f.] If one wanted to spent some time documenting a library or extension (one's
  | 87860 [dave@pr gp o] For Ruby libraries, you could just have a look at RDoc's README for
  | + 87877 [gsinclair@so] ...
  | + 87878 [gsinclair@so] - file-level comments can be used to describe background (e.g. CGI)
  + 87875 [matz@ru y- a] For documenting Ruby code, yes.  But it's still used for other
    87879 [gsinclair@so] Hmmm... I've written a couple of articles and was wondering what might be

[BUG] greedy gsub
87806 [ahoward@ng c] ~/eg/ruby > cat bug.rb
87808 [decoux@mo lo] no, no

Ruby-Talk Subject Matters
87819 [transami@ru ] Out of curiosity, how do others feel about "suggestive" threads? Do you feel
+ 87824 [jgb3@em il b] "Suggestive", meaning "suggesting new features?"  I'm still pretty new
| 87905 [martindemell] Unless he meant "Christina Aguilera naked 1782" :)
+ 87825 [hal9000@hy e] Just my opinion.
| + 87830 [vjoel@PA H. ] ...
| + 87831 [dcarrera@ma ] What's an RCR?
| | + 87835 [neoneye@ad l] terminology used in our community :-)
| | | 87838 [dcarrera@ma ] He he.
| | + 87840 [transami@ru ] Ruby Change Request.
| | | 87915 [batsman.geo@] Don't spread the confusion anymore! :-)
| | | 87917 [transami@ru ] That's not true. That's only applies to Ruby itself. And not, for instance,
| | + 87866 [surrender_it] ehi, IMO the keyword is 'endles'.
| + 87839 [neoneye@ad l] How about announcements, are they considered signal?  or noise?
|   87850 [gsinclair@so] Hal mentioned RAA and RubyForge announcements.  I think they're an
+ 87886 [austin@ha os] I think, in general, such discussions are good if short. However, I stopped

OCaml:Haskell::Perl:Ruby? (was Underpinnings of Method Wrapping)
87837 [transami@ru ] It was more of a joke than anything else. Somtimes it is a bit of an eye sore
87853 [michael_s_ca] anyway.

rbbr errors  (was: Re: rexml, rbbr, ruby-mysql, and exerb errors)
87847 [rich@li hi o] Thanks for your suggestions (and for your patience) ... here is everything
87974 [mutoh@hi hw ] Thanks for detail reporting.
88000 [rich@li hi o] So the first 18 lines of file 'stockbrowser.rb' at location
88051 [mutoh@hi hw ] Good.
+ 88076 [rich@li hi o] errors)
| 88095 [nobu.nokada@] all user specific data are stored there.  On Windows, "My
+ 88083 [surrender_it] wow, if you're going to correct such issues[1], I'd like to add dsome
+ 88099 [surrender_it] I just sent a longer message that does not seem to have appeared here.
  88145 [mutoh@hi hw ] Hmm, rbbr doesn't use %USERPROFILE% directly.
  88154 [surrender_it] thanks for the answer.. and btw, thanks for ths suggested fix, set

[ANN] Ruby Standard Library Documentation v0.8.1
87848 [gsinclair@so] Folks,

Simple issue giving problems
87856 [coish@hf .e ] I have a problem that may or may not be an easy fix. :)
+ 87858 [jgb3@em il b] Well... given that the swap is only a one-liner, you really don't need
| + 87868 [coish@hf .e ] Thanks for your speedy response.  You are quite correct as there is a
| + 87900 [ jupp@gm .d ] def swapper(first, second)
|   87909 [bob.news@gm ] "Josef 'Jupp' SCHUGT" <jupp@gmx.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
|   87956 [ jupp@gm .d ] Of course. Unless the aim is an exercise in functional programming.
+ 87859 [bystr@ma .c ] a=1
| 87869 [coish@hf .e ] True, in the case you present I would not expect a and b to be altered.
| 87870 [coish@hf .e ] Sorry didn't mean to send that one. :)  Hit wrong key sequence.
| + 87871 [neoneye@ad l] irb(main):001:0> ary=%w(a b c d)
| + 87873 [surrender_it] I don't think this is possible. The only thing you can do is wrap vars
| + 87911 [bob.news@gm ] "Brad" <coish@hfx.eastlink.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
| + 87982 [jweirich@on ] No, it doesn't hurt to ask.
|   88019 [coish@hf .e ] Thanks for the reply, it's appreciated.  I think this may be what I'm
+ 87931 [surrender_it] ...
+ 87933 [surrender_it] def swapper(obj,a,b)
  87939 [news@st d. t] Because the scope of the variables is different, I believe. The method

Appending to an array
87857 [thomas_adam1] I am having a rather weird problem with array manipulation.
+ 87861 [jgb3@em il b] The << operator for array only appends the single object given to the
| + 87862 [thomas_adam1] James,
| | 87864 [lewisd@f0 f.] a = []
| + 87912 [bob.news@gm ] "Jamis Buck" <jgb3@email.byu.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
+ 87865 [bystr@ma .c ] Here uniq() returns an array and you are adding this single object of

YAML treatment of '#' character in middle of a string
87867 [dblack@wo bl] I'm wondering whether the "#" and everything after it are
+ 87920 [mike@ra do .] suggests this is the right behaviour; so the quites are necessary.
| 87922 [dblack@wo bl] I'd read that part of the spec yesterday and come away uncertain
+ 87938 [ruby-talk@wh] Treatment of the comment character has long been discussed on the yaml-core
  88012 [dave@pr gp o] As it stands right now, though, yaml can't read it's own output, which
  88144 [ruby-talk@wh] Yeah, that bug was fixed a few hours after you reported it.  Checked into Ruby
  88146 [dave@pr gp o] I know that feeling :)

Fwd: Can't define +@ for Symbol (plus ruby install problem)
87876 [transami@ru ] I wanted to see if the +@ problem was fixed in 1.8.1 preview 3 but when I do
87883 [Peter.Vanbro] Maybe the parser discards the +, since for numbers it usually is a no-op.

Nuby interruption (Was: Can't define +@ for Symbol (plus ruby install problem))
87880 [dhtapp@co .n] uses
87881 [transami@ru ] +@ and -@ are used to define unary operators for + (plus) and - (minus). It is
87940 [vjoel@PA H. ] irb(main):001:0> class Foo; def ~@; "FOO"; end; end

backtick processes running away
87887 [kdresner@cs ] I have a program right now that as part of its behavior runs some
87888 [kdresner@cs ] Nevermind, looks like popen works afterall.

History of programming languages
87889 [dcarrera@ma ] Here is a diagram with a "family tree" showing the history of programming
87918 [lewisd@f0 f.] Has Ruby really been around since February 1993?
87921 [dblack@wo bl] Yes.
87923 [neoneye@ad l] Simon Strandgaard

getting a method from a block in C
87890 [elathan@ph s] def bar
87891 [decoux@mo lo] if (rb_block_given_p()) {
87893 [elathan@ph s] Ah nice! That is what I wanted. Thanks a lot.
87896 [decoux@mo lo] yes, the block must be marked otherwise the ruby GC will remove it.
87978 [elathan@ph s] foo.rb:42: [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type 0x28(0x89963f8) non object

regexp for $(text)
87892 [drejewic@ws ] I have string
87894 [emmanuel.tou] just escape the ( and the $.
87895 [emmanuel.tou] irb(main):004:0> a.scan(/\$\((\w+)\)/).flatten
+ 87897 [drejewic@ws ] Thank you :-)
+ 87913 [bob.news@gm ] "Emmanuel Touzery" <emmanuel.touzery@wanadoo.fr> schrieb im Newsbeitrag

MAKE QUICK CASH RIGHT NOW!!! 100% LEGAL, INSTRUCTIONS IN THIS POST!!
87898 [acidcash@ho ] HOW TO MAKE TONS OF QUICK MONEY, GUARANTEED!

threads and io
87903 [temuphaey0@j] I have soe problems whitn treads and I/O.
+ 87904 [surrender_it] if you're working on windows, that is a known issue I'm afraid :(
+ 87908 [neoneye@ad l] Tell us about what you are trying to accomplish?
+ 87919 [lewisd@f0 f.] I think the problem here is that you're getting some sort of exception
  88128 [temuphaey0@j] Threads and Processes
threads.html
top