[#3861] super — ts <decoux@...>
[#3862] Marshal.dump'ing OpenStruct objects — Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
Hi,
[#3881] mkdir, mkdir_p in FileUtils and mode — Florian Frank <flori@...>
Hello,
[#3907] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...>
The attached patch implements IO#mode. This method returns the mode the IO
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:25:13AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
Jos Backus wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:47:48AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:40:33PM +0900, James Britt wrote:
[#3914] Pathname needs a makeover — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Hi all,
[#3922] Incorrect escaping in strings produced by String::inspect — noreply@...
Bugs item #1173, was opened at 2004-12-08 17:35
[#3966] unknown node type 0 — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...>
I still get this happening a lot with my Rubyx linux ruby script.
This is a long standing bug in Ruby, and has been reported hundreds of times
Hi,
[#3975] Patches to test/unit — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
I believe these are the minimal patches needed to make it possible to
[#3982] Win32: rb_sys_fail() - errno == 0 — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
[#4000] 1.8.2 preview4 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Hello,
[#4009] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — mde@...26.com
First of all, I think it would be great, as Eustaquio suggests, to
GETs and POSTs are defined to be fairly different actions. I'd read
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Francis Hwang wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
First of all, the entire discussion of when GET is appropriate
mde@state26.com wrote:
[#4027] Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
Hi,
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
I'm not sure I would advocate making Ruby's grammar even more
>
Brent Roman wrote:
> Brent Roman wrote:
Brent Roman wrote:
> Florian Gross wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
[#4033] Garbage collection trouble — Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Hello,
>>>>> "C" == Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> writes:
ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:
>>>>> "C" == Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> writes:
[#4040] Extensions, Internal — Jgen Mangler <juergen.mangler@...>
Hi,
Re: Pathname needs a makeover
Tanaka Akira wrote:
>> First of all, Python people discuss various points for a class for
pathname.
>> http://people.nl.linux.org/~gerrit/creaties/path/pep-xxxx.html
> It may be interesting because some points you mention is disscussed.
Definitely looks interesting. I'll take a look.
>> A pathname is a string. Therefore, it should be a subclass of String
> No. Various string operations are not suitable for pathname.
> For example, Pathname.new("a") + Pathname.new("b") is
Pathname.new("a/b"),
> not Pathname.new("ab").
Then you redefine the methods that need it.
> Also I want to distinct a pathname and a content of file.
> For example, my library for HTML, HTree, has HTree.new(arg) method.
> If arg is a string, arg is treated as HTML content. If arg is a
pathname,
> arg is opened and its content is parsed.
Then, IMHO, you should use duck-typing rather than checking the class
type.
> pathname.open and pathname.read is required for polymorphic to URI.
> If pathname and open-uri is in effect, uri.read and pathname.read can
> be used polymorphically.
I don't follow. Can you provide an example?
>> - It should make private methods private.
> Acceptable. List of methods?
It looks like any method with a :nodoc: tag is meant to be private.
Regards,
Dan