[#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: Hash#delete - inconsistent with docs
Hi --
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Charles Mills wrote:
> irb(main):001:0> h = Hash.new("go fish")
> => {}
> irb(main):002:0> h.delete("foo")
> => nil
>
> $ ri Hash#delete
> ------------------------------------------------------------ Hash#delete
> hsh.delete(key) => value
> hsh.delete(key) {| key | block } => value
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Deletes and returns a key-value pair from hsh whose key is equal
> to key. If the key is not found, returns the default value. If the
> optional code block is given and the key is not found, pass in the
> key and return the result of block.
>
> h = { "a" => 100, "b" => 200 }
> h.delete("a") #=> 100
> h.delete("z") #=> nil
> h.delete("z") { |el| "#{el} not found" } #=> "z not found"
>
>
> I expected
>> h.delete("foo") #=> "go fish"
> or for the docs to say 'If the key is not found, returns nil'.
That behavior seems to have changed since 1.6.8:
ruby -ve 'h=Hash.new("x"); h[1]=2; p h.delete("y"); p h.delete(1)'
ruby 1.6.8 (2002-12-24) [i686-linux]
"x"
2
though I can't find it mentioned in the ChangeLog. (Maybe that's why
the doc wasn't updated.)
David
--
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net