[#12372] Release compatibility/train — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...>

Hello all,

28 messages 2007/10/03
[#12373] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12374] Re: Release compatibility/train — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12376] Re: Release compatibility/train — Prashant Srinivasan <Prashant.Srinivasan@...> 2007/10/03

[#12377] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12382] Re: Release compatibility/train — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12385] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12388] Re: Release compatibility/train — Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@...> 2007/10/03

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12389] Re: Release compatibility/train — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/03

Hi,

[#12406] Re: Release compatibility/train — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2007/10/03

Hi --

[#12383] Include Rake in Ruby 1.9 — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

20 messages 2007/10/03

[#12539] Ordered Hashes in 1.9? — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>

Hi all,

17 messages 2007/10/08
[#12542] Re: Ordered Hashes in 1.9? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/08

Hi,

[#12681] Unicode: Progress? — murphy <murphy@...>

Hello!

17 messages 2007/10/15

[#12693] retry: revised 1.9 http patch — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>

I'm reposting this because I've had little response to this version

11 messages 2007/10/15

[#12697] Range.first is incompatible with Enumerable.first — David Flanagan <david@...>

The new Enumerable.first method is a generalization of Array.first to

11 messages 2007/10/16

[#12754] Improving 'syntax error, unexpected $end, expecting kEND'? — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>

I've had a look at this, but can't see how to do it: When I get

17 messages 2007/10/18
[#12886] Re: Improving 'syntax error, unexpected $end, expecting kEND'? — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

The patch below changes this message to:

[#12758] Encoding::primary_encoding — David Flanagan <david@...>

Hi,

25 messages 2007/10/18
[#12763] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/19

Hi,

[#12802] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/21

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12803] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/21

Hi,

[#12804] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/21

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12808] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12818] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang N疆asi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/22

Nobuyoshi Nakada schrieb:

[#12820] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — "Michal Suchanek" <hramrach@...> 2007/10/22

T24gMjIvMTAvMjAwNywgV29sZmdhbmcgTsOhZGFzaS1Eb25uZXIgPGVkLm9kYW5vd0B3b25hZG8u

[#12823] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/22

Michal Suchanek schrieb:

[#12824] Re: Encoding::primary_encoding — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12767] \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...>

Back at the end of August, Matz wrote (see

45 messages 2007/10/19
[#12769] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — "Nobuyoshi Nakada" <nobu@...> 2007/10/19

Hi,

[#12782] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/20

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#12831] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/22

Hi,

[#12841] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/22

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#12862] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/23

At 04:19 07/10/23, David Flanagan wrote:

[#12864] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

Martin Duerst wrote:

[#12870] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/23

At 13:10 07/10/23, David Flanagan wrote:

[#12872] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/23

Martin Duerst wrote:

[#12936] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/25

Hi,

[#12980] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/26

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#13028] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/29

Hi,

[#13032] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — David Flanagan <david@...> 2007/10/29

Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#13034] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/29

Hi,

[#13082] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/10/30

At 16:46 07/10/29, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#13231] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/11/06

Hi,

[#13234] Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept implementation — Martin Duerst <duerst@...> 2007/11/06

At 11:29 07/11/06, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:

[#12825] clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...>

Hi,

53 messages 2007/10/22
[#12830] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Ben Bleything <ben@...> 2007/10/22

On Mon, Oct 22, 2007, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#12833] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/22

On 23/10/07 at 00:13 +0900, Ben Bleything wrote:

[#12835] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/22

On 10/22/07, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:

[#12836] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/22

On 23/10/07 at 01:55 +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#12888] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/10/23

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#12894] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/24

On 24/10/07 at 05:14 +0900, Gonzalo Garramu wrote:

[#13057] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Gonzalo Garramu <ggarra@...> 2007/10/29

Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

[#13058] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/29

On 30/10/07 at 07:28 +0900, Gonzalo Garramu wrote:

[#12848] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — Sam Roberts <sroberts@...> 2007/10/22

On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 01:55:29AM +0900, Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#12855] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/23

On 10/22/07, Sam Roberts <sroberts@uniserve.com> wrote:

[#13016] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — bob@... (Bob Proulx) 2007/10/28

Austin Ziegler wrote:

[#13029] Re: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths? — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/29

On 10/28/07, Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> wrote:

[#13054] Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@...> 2007/10/29

Austin,

[#13055] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/29

On 10/29/07, Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net> wrote:

[#13064] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Austin Ziegler" <halostatue@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/29/07, Luis Lavena <luislavena@gmail.com> wrote:

[#13066] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/30/07, Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:

[#13094] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Rick Bradley" <rick@...> 2007/10/30

Do we think that maybe, just maybe, things went off the rails when the

[#13095] Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?) — "Luis Lavena" <luislavena@...> 2007/10/30

On 10/30/07, Rick Bradley <rick@rickbradley.com> wrote:

[#12900] Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...>

Dear Ruby 1.9 architects, developers, and testers!

31 messages 2007/10/24
[#12905] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/24

Hi,

[#12907] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/24

Yukihiro Matsumoto schrieb:

[#12909] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2007/10/24

Hi,

[#12940] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/25
[#12942] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...> 2007/10/25

I have a (hopefully) final question before testing all

[#12948] Re: Hopefully Complete List of Possible Encoding Specifications - Existing Ones — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...> 2007/10/26

Hi,

[#12951] Fluent programming in Ruby — David Flanagan <david@...>

From the ChangeLog:

16 messages 2007/10/26

[#12996] General hash keys for colon notation — murphy <murphy@...>

Dear language designer(s) and parser wizards,

16 messages 2007/10/28

[#13027] Implementation of "guessUTF" method - final questions — Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner <ed.odanow@...>

Dear Ruby designers, developers, and testers!

22 messages 2007/10/29

[#13069] new Enumerable.butfirst method — David Flanagan <david@...>

Matz,

17 messages 2007/10/30

Re: new Enumerable.butfirst method

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2007-10-30 07:12:53 UTC
List: ruby-core #13084
Hi,

In message "Re: new Enumerable.butfirst method"
    on Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:41:39 +0900, David Flanagan <david@davidflanagan.com> writes:

|You wrote in your recent changelog entry:
|
|	* enum.c (enum_butfirst): add a new method to iterates over
|	  elements but first n.  RDoc need to be updated.
|
|I'd be happy to update the rdoc comment, but it looks okay as it is to 
|me.  Did you just want an example added?  Or something else?

I was not confident about my English description.  If it's OK, it's
OK.  Thanks.

|I should say, however, that I don't care for the name 'butfirst'.

It's a traditional name (but slightly different behavior) inherited
from Logo.  In Logo, butfirst is cdr in Lisp, which returns given list
with its first element removed.

|I've got three alternatives to propose:
|
|1) How about 'skip' (or 'discard') instead, which would nicely support 
|its use as an enumerator like this:
|
|     c.skip(n).map {|x|...}  # map all but the first n
|
|If you like this, I'd also propose 'only' (or 'limit'):
|
|     c.only(n).map { |x| ...} # iterates no more than n elements from c

We already have #first, that works in reverse of #butfirst.  I am not
sure skip/only pair is better, especially when #only would work same
as #first.

|2) Another idea would be to be more verbose than 'butfirst': 
|each_but_first, which is much clearer and is similar to the existing 
|each_with_index.  Then the opposite method would be each_but_only to 
|iterate only the first n?

It's redundant, when we want to call #butfirst on Enumerator, e.g.

  (1..1000).map{|x| x*2}.butfirst(2).with_index{|x,i| p [x,i]}

|3) Is there some way to integrate your butfirst with the earlier added 
|take and drop methods?  If you removed the form of drop and take that 
|accept a block, and modified them to be iterators instead of returning 
|an array, then you'd end up with this butfirst, with a much more natural 
|(in my opinion) name.

Hmm, drop (which is new in 1.9) to work as butfirst may be a better
idea than just adding butfirst.  Let me consider.

							matz.

In This Thread