[#10193] String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

41 messages 2007/02/05
[#10197] Re: String.ord — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/02/06

Hi,

[#10198] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#10199] Re: String.ord — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2007/02/06

David Flanagan wrote:

[#10200] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Daniel Berger wrote:

[#10208] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10213] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/06

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10215] Re: String.ord — "Nikolai Weibull" <now@...> 2007/02/06

On 2/6/07, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> wrote:

[#10216] Re: String.ord — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/02/07

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

[#10288] Socket library should support abstract unix sockets — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8597, was opened at 2007-02-13 16:10

12 messages 2007/02/13

[#10321] File.basename fails on Windows root paths — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #8676, was opened at 2007-02-15 10:09

11 messages 2007/02/15

[#10323] Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...>

Some of the Ruby code used by TextMate makes use of xmlrpc/

31 messages 2007/02/15
[#10324] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...> 2007/02/15

> -----Original Message-----

[#10326] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/15

On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Berger, Daniel wrote:

[#10342] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

While I am complaining about xmlrpc, we have another issue. It's

[#10343] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — Alex Young <alex@...> 2007/02/16

James Edward Gray II wrote:

[#10344] Re: Trouble with xmlrpc — James Edward Gray II <james@...> 2007/02/16

On Feb 16, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Alex Young wrote:

Re: Ruby 1.9: Why the change to the return values of #instance_variables?

From: Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
Date: 2007-02-04 00:50:00 UTC
List: ruby-core #10188
Hi,

At Sun, 4 Feb 2007 09:32:54 +0900,
Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote in [ruby-core:10187]:
> > Now, I don't *really* need this particular test except to dramatically
> > reduce the number of warnings generated by Transaction::Simple; what
> > I'm curious about is why the change was made. Alternatively, without
> > doing a check on RUBY_VERSION, how can I have one test that works in
> > both Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9?
> 
> 1.9 has and 1.8.6 will have #instance_variable_defined? method.

You can use this code for previous versions.

  unless defined?(instance_variable_defined?)
    module Kernel
      (t = Object.new).instance_eval {@instance_variable = 1}
      case t.instance_variables[0]
      when Symbol
        def instance_variable_defined?(var)
  	instance_variables.include?(var.to_sym)
        end
      when String
        def instance_variable_defined?(var)
  	instance_variables.include?(var.to_s)
        end
      end
    end
  end

-- 
Nobu Nakada

In This Thread