[#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: Question about the latest change to test/unit library

From: Kent Sibilev <ksibilev@...>
Date: 2004-12-23 18:32:52 UTC
List: ruby-core #4014
I didn't know about testrb script. Wouldn't it make sense to keep that 
other way of running tests as well? Since it is just a matter of this 
small change:

Index: unit.rb
===================================================================
RCS file: /src/ruby/lib/test/unit.rb,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -r1.11 unit.rb
276c276
<     exit Test::Unit::AutoRunner.run($0 != "-e" && $0)
---
 >     exit Test::Unit::AutoRunner.run($0)


Cheers,
Kent.

On Dec 23, 2004, at 11:30 AM, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

> Hi,
>
> At Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:52:36 +0900,
> Kent Sibilev wrote in [ruby-core:04008]:
>> It used to be possible to run unit test scripts by simply requiring
>> them like this:
>>
>> $ ruby -runit_test_1 -runit_test2 -runit_test3 -e0
>>
>> The following change broke it:
>
> I didn't think that usage, but testrb script, for such purpose.
>
> -- 
> Nobu Nakada
>


In This Thread

Prev Next