[#5563] Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@...>

Lately, I've been thinking about the future of ruby

44 messages 2005/08/19
[#5564] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...> 2005/08/19

On 8/19/05, Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@yahoo.com> wrote:

[#5571] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@...> 2005/08/19

--- Austin Ziegler <halostatue@gmail.com> wrote:

[#5574] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — TRANS <transfire@...> 2005/08/20

Just wanted to add a few things.

[#5581] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...> 2005/08/20

On 8/19/05, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:

[#5583] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2005/08/20

Hi --

[#5585] Re: Non-overridable and non-redefinable methods — Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@...> 2005/08/20

--- "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:

[#5609] Pathname#walk for traversing path nodes (patch) — ES <ruby-ml@...>

Here is a small addition to Pathname against 1.9, probably suited

20 messages 2005/08/22

Re: File.basename default suffix?

From: Jason Foreman <threeve.org@...>
Date: 2005-08-18 20:54:06 UTC
List: ruby-core #5559
On 8/18/05, Daniel Berger <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> A recent discussion on file renaming made me wonder something about
> File.basename.
> 
> Is there any reason that the suffix shouldn't default to ".*" ?
> 
> Current behavior:  File.basename("foo.rb") # -> "foo.rb"
> Proposed behavior: File.basename("foo.rb") # -> "foo"
> 
> The current behavior just seems rather pointless to me.  Or is there a
> good reason for not setting the suffix to a default value?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 


You'd lose the capability to grab just the filename out of a path then.

File.basename('/home/users/foo/bar.rb') # => "bar.rb"


In This Thread