[#4065] Surprise in Time#sec — Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@...>
This bit me:
[#4067] Segfault in Thread#initialize / caller — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin!
[#4076] Ruby/DL — Jamis Buck <jamis_buck@...>
I recently used Ruby/DL to create bindings to the SQLite3 embedded
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:53:49AM +0900, Jamis Buck wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 03:05:48AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 01:10:34AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 06:57:57PM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:06:16AM +0900, ts wrote:
>>>>> "P" == Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
ts wrote:
[#4116] Test::Unit::Collector::Dir won't work with code that modifies $LOAD_PATH — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Any test code that depends upon modifications of $: fails when used
Hi,
On 11 Jan 2005, at 04:14, nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
On 11 Jan 2005, at 09:39, Eric Hodel wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:06:10 +0900, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 23:48:58 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 17:17:14 -0500, Nathaniel Talbott
[#4146] The face of Unicode support in the future — Charles O Nutter <headius@...>
Hello Rubyists!
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> writes:
Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:53:48PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:13:35PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4189] Authenticated proxy support for open-uri — Neil Kohl <nakohl@...>
Hello!
[#4232] Carriage return on shebang — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4242] tracer.rb: Do not list pseudo source lines of binary extensions — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4243] Patch that enables https in open-uri.rb — Michael Neumann <mneumann@...>
Hi,
In article <41E93F42.9090705@ntecs.de>,
Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4269] Re: The face of Unicode support in the future — Wes Nakamura <wknaka@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
[#4296] parse_c.rb: allow whitespace after function names — Tilman Sauerbeck <tilman@...>
Hi,
Hi,
Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> [2005-01-21 17:43]:
[#4311] RFE: Enumerable#group_by, Array#^ — Florian Gro<florgro@...>
Moin.
[#4323] test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception — Tanaka Akira <akr@...17n.org>
test/unit doesn't rescue a Exception in a test method, as follows.
In article <87is5jb46q.fsf@serein.a02.aist.go.jp>,
On 9/1/06, Tanaka Akira <akr@fsij.org> wrote:
On Sep 2, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
In article <A604C0B3-95ED-4B9B-866C-79A2C7D5E3C4@segment7.net>,
On Sep 2, 2006, at 9:39 PM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <622DAC7E-55DB-4854-B82B-A037CE9C75EF@segment7.net>,
In article <87ac5hv4bo.fsf@fsij.org>,
On Sep 3, 2006, at 8:21 AM, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#4332] IO#clearerr missing in action — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
I wanted to implement tail(1) in ruby cleanly, but found the best I
[#4335] When will Object#type disappear? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
Re: Allowing custom number literal suffixes?
> Florian Gross wrote: > > > Incorrect, I was referring to something like "foobar"Q which could work similar to Peter's Patch. > But as noted above: I'm happy with Number suffixes and would like to see those implemented; > I'm neutral about this, however. > > This seems to be compatible with the patch from Peter. While I dislike the \...\ syntax I would not need to use this. So if matz and the community are okay with this I'm not going to complain. > > I don't need the arbitrary character part, but I guess my goals are mostly a subset of yours. > > It seems I have a hard time finding support for Numeric literals because most people are not using the Number classes of the standard library. But having a simpler way of using them would lead to them being used more frequently, I think. It seems to be sort of a circular problem... > I would have to assume that 'foobar'Q would also work. As would %q|foobar!Q Can you confirm this? My backslashes were just an alternative way of quoting a string. They allow for the embedded tics and double-quotes that are so common with real-world measures -- especially where inches and feet are still the norm! They also disambiguate the Prefix notation: Time"12AM" #method call? Time\12AM\ #calls Kernel::Literal::Prefix.Time But, if we drop support for the prefix notation, we don't really need backslash quotes. This is OK by me. Ruby already has enough string quoting mechanisms. String suffixes then does go a long way towards making the literal definition mechanism more generic. I still don't understand why: '12:30'am or '9:15'GMT or even 9.15utc should be problematic. They would call: String::Literal.am, String::Literal.GMT and String::Literal.utc respectively. Where Literal is a module in the built-in String class. So, why insist that suffixes be single letters? Is there a parsing ambiguity that would result from allowing a suffix to be any legal method identifier? This certainly would result in more readable code and far less chance that different libraries would attempt to define literals with the same suffix. - brent