[#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: [PATCH] make Test::Unit output more Emacs friendly format

From: "Zev Blut" <rubyzbibd@...>
Date: 2007-02-19 05:23:46 UTC
List: ruby-core #10367
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:54:03 +0900, Sam Roberts <sroberts@uniserve.com>  
wrote:

> Quoting kou@cozmixng.org, on Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 09:37:19PM +0900:
>> Is there any reason why backtraces outputted by Test::Unit
>> are indented? If there are any strong reason, I want
>> Test::Unit to stop indenting.
>
> I don't mind the indenting stop, as long as it doesn't break vim's ruby
> support, which has code to understand the indenting.
>
> Wouldn't it be reasonable to add a "runner":
>
>       -r, --runner=RUNNER              Use the given RUNNER.
>                                            (c[onsole], f[ox], g[tk],  
> g[tk]2, t[k])
>
> so that -r emacs/simple/plain or whatever got rid of the fancy
> formatting, and dumped in the simple format?

That or we can do as vim and add a patch to the emacs ruby-mode to
recognize Test::Unit output.

I am using the hook by steve_molitor on:
http://wiki.rubygarden.org/Ruby/page/show/EmacsExtensions

Perhaps, we should add this to the default ruby-mode?

Zev


In This Thread

Prev Next