[#3113] Problem in RSS library, or problem in my blog :) — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
I've been trying to use the new RSS library to parse a number of
7 messages
2004/07/01
[#3136] Wrong rdoc formatting in {array,pack}.c — Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
7 messages
2004/07/05
[#3162] Re: [doc-patch] Wrong rdoc formatting in {array,pack}.c
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2004/07/09
Hello.
[#3170] Another rdoc formatting error in array.c
— Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
2004/07/10
[#3172] Re: [doc-patch] Another rdoc formatting error in array.c
— "H.Yamamoto" <ocean@...2.ccsnet.ne.jp>
2004/07/12
Hello.
[#3141] rexml/validation/validationexception is missing. — nobu.nokada@...
Hi,
5 messages
2004/07/06
[#3154] Nonblocking socket connect - Win32 - 181 — "Jean-Francois Nadeau" <jean-francois.nadeau@...>
Hi,
4 messages
2004/07/08
[#3167] Inconsistent "call-seq" usage etc. — Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
7 messages
2004/07/09
[#3168] Re: [doc] Inconsistent "call-seq" usage etc.
— Dave Thomas <dave@...>
2004/07/09
[#3171] binding a URL to a label in RDoc — Ian Macdonald <ian@...>
Hello,
6 messages
2004/07/12
[#3199] Trying to understand \G — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
I'm being silly again, but I can't get \G to work with String.index. If
12 messages
2004/07/16
[#3213] Typo and grammar/style fixes for ext/win32ole/win32ole.c — Jos Backus <jos@...>
The attached patch attempts to create a more consistent style for error
4 messages
2004/07/19
[#3216] Re: Incident Analysis of the intrusion on helium.ruby-lang.org May 2004 — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...>
Hi,
6 messages
2004/07/21
[#3228] Core support for Gems, and namespace — "Luke A. Kanies" <luke@...>
Hi all,
21 messages
2004/07/27
[#3229] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Dave Thomas <dave@...>
2004/07/27
[#3232] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— "Luke A. Kanies" <luke@...>
2004/07/27
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#3233] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
2004/07/27
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 12:48:07 AM, Luke wrote:
[#3235] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— "Luke A. Kanies" <luke@...>
2004/07/27
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
[#3230] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2004/07/27
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:39:08 +0900, Luke A. Kanies <luke@madstop.com> wrote:
[#3234] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— "Luke A. Kanies" <luke@...>
2004/07/27
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Austin Ziegler wrote:
[#3238] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2004/07/27
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:14:29 +0900, Luke A. Kanies <luke@madstop.com> wrote:
[#3243] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
2004/07/28
On Wednesday, July 28, 2004, 3:23:46 AM, Austin wrote:
[#3248] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
2004/07/28
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:29:53 +0900, Gavin Sinclair
[#3249] Re: Core support for Gems, and namespace
— Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
2004/07/28
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:29:53AM +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
Reporting RI-documentation corrections ?
From:
Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...>
Date:
2004-07-05 13:15:57 UTC
List:
ruby-core #3132
Hi !
What is the preferred way to report corrections
to the RI-documenation ?
I have noticed some errors (both content and formatting) and think
it would nice if they were corrected.
I while ago I reported a minor "typo" in the RI documentation here
on this list (see the end of this mail), but received no response
whatsoever.
Maybe this list is the wrong forum to report such stuff ???
Maybe there is some person that have a special "responsibility"
for making sure the RI-documenation is up-to-date ?
/Johan Holmberg
----------------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Johan Holmberg wrote:
> Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:22:48 +0900
> From: Johan Holmberg <holmberg@iar.se>
> To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
> Subject: Enumerable#each_with_index in "ri"
>
>
> The description in "ri" of the return value of
> Enumerable#each_with_index seem to be incorrect.
> How about applying the following change ?
>
> /Johan Holmberg
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> --- enum.c.orig 2004-04-14 06:06:24.000000000 +0200
> +++ enum.c 2004-06-12 16:59:26.000000000 +0200
> @@ -806,7 +806,7 @@
>
> /*
> * call-seq:
> - * enum.each_with_index {|obj, i| block } -> nil
> + * enum.each_with_index {|obj, i| block } -> enum
> *
> * Calls <em>block</em> with two arguments, the item and its index, for
> * each item in <i>enum</i>.
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>