[#3907] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...>

The attached patch implements IO#mode. This method returns the mode the IO

17 messages 2004/12/06
[#3909] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — nobu.nokada@... 2004/12/07

Hi,

[#3910] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — Jos Backus <jos@...> 2004/12/07

On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 09:25:13AM +0900, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

[#3925] Re: [patch] Obtaining mode information on an IO object — James Britt <ruby@...> 2004/12/09

Jos Backus wrote:

[#4009] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — mde@...26.com

First of all, I think it would be great, as Eustaquio suggests, to

17 messages 2004/12/23
[#4016] Re: [PATCH] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff — Francis Hwang <sera@...> 2004/12/24

GETs and POSTs are defined to be fairly different actions. I'd read

[#4027] Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...>

Moin!

35 messages 2004/12/27
[#4070] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — nobu.nokada@... 2005/01/02

Hi,

[#4072] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/02

[#4079] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...> 2005/01/03

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

[#4081] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/03

[#4082] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Florian Gro<florgro@...> 2005/01/03

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

[#4084] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2005/01/04

I'm not sure I would advocate making Ruby's grammar even more

[#4086] Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2005/01/04

[#4033] Garbage collection trouble — Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>

Hello,

13 messages 2004/12/27

Re: Patches to test/unit

From: Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Date: 2004-12-20 04:29:20 UTC
List: ruby-core #3988
On Dec 18, 2004, at 5:16 PM, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

> Already you can do:
>
>   $ ruby -rtest/unit -rtest/unit/autorunner -e 
> Test::Unit::AutoRunner.run

Given that the code in test/unit.rb is only used by autorunner.rb, I 
think that it is still the correct thing to do to move it to 
autorunner.rb. That way test/unit can be used in more ways w/o an 
at_exit handler that is provided in test/unit.rb getting in the way.

> Or
>
>   $ testrb .

I didn't know about testrb, but I can't seem to get it to work like you 
demonstrated:

<510> testrb18 .
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/cache.rb:36:in 
`from_installed_gems': /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/rational.rb:53:in 
`reduce': stack level too deep (SystemStackError)
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/rational.rb:43:in `Rational'
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/rational.rb:136:in `/'
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/rational.rb:139:in `/'
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/date.rb:424:in `jd_to_ajd'
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/date.rb:703:in `today'
         from 
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/specification.rb:264:in 
`date='
         from 
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/specification.rb:254:in 
`date='
         from 
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/specification.rb:342:in 
`send'
          ... 813 levels...
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit/autorunner.rb:68
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit/autorunner.rb:63:in `[]'
         from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit/autorunner.rb:192:in 
`run'
         from /usr/local/bin/testrb18:5


In This Thread

Prev Next