[#10853] Why limit class def to a constant or colon node? — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>

Is there a historical reason why I can't do something like these:

12 messages 2007/04/03

[#10933] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #10140, was opened at 2007-04-16 17:32

10 messages 2007/04/16
[#10934] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10140 ] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — nobu@... 2007/04/16

Hi,

[#10960] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10140 ] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...> 2007/04/18

On 4/16/07, nobu@ruby-lang.org <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#10967] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10140 ] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/04/19

Hi,

[#10970] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-10140 ] Cannot build with extra library path if previous version already installed — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...> 2007/04/19

On 4/19/07, Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:> Hi,>> At Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:21:44 +0900,> Michal Suchanek wrote in [ruby-core:10960]:> > Yes. And this should also apply to extensions. The mkmf tests are now> > fine but the extension is linked with -L/sw/lib before -L../..>> Indeed.>>> Index: configure.in> ===================================================================> --- configure.in (revision 12191)> +++ configure.in (working copy)> @@ -1385,5 +1385,4 @@ if test "$enable_rpath" = yes; then> fi>> -LDFLAGS="-L. $LDFLAGS"> AC_SUBST(ARCHFILE)>This would break the previous fix so I did not even try to apply this ^

[#11003] miniruby loads extensions from already installed ruby — <noreply@...>

Bugs item #10303, was opened at 2007-04-23 10:44

10 messages 2007/04/23

[#11025] gsub with backslash characters in replacement string — "Adam Bozanich" <adam.boz@...>

Hello, spotted this one the other day:

10 messages 2007/04/26

Re: Why limit class def to a constant or colon node?

From: Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...>
Date: 2007-04-10 07:00:43 UTC
List: ruby-core #10903
Rick DeNatale wrote:
> It seems to me that java package naming maps more natuarally to nested
> Ruby modules
> 
> why not
> 
> module Java
> end
> 
> module Java::Lang
> end
> 
> class Java::Lang::System
> end

Actually something very similar to this is planned for post 1.0, but for 
now to make the syntax as friendly as possible it uses method tricks...

java.lang.System

...calls "java", returning the "java" package object, then calls "lang" 
on that package, returning the "java.lang" package object, then calls 
System on that package, returning the "java.lang.System" proxy class. 
But in the future, I think it would better map to exactly what you've 
described, in addition to having the Ruby class hierarchy representing 
Java types map directly to the Java type hierarchy, with modules playing 
the role of interfaces.

But I still think being able to do

class some_method(); da da da; end

...makes sense.

- Charlie

In This Thread