[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Re: rss patch -- mostly doc, plus English adjustments.

From: Kouhei Sutou <kou@...>
Date: 2006-07-14 11:47:31 UTC
List: ruby-core #8220
Hi,

In <BE04AE19-BBB8-4EB5-A064-4A4CF3CC7DA0@segment7.net>
  "Re: rss patch -- mostly doc, plus English adjustments." on Fri, 14 Jul 2006 03:38:07 +0900,
  Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:

> On Jul 13, 2006, at 4:38 AM, Kouhei Sutou wrote:
> 
> > In <Pine.GSO.4.64.0607121836100.17386@brains.eng.cse.dmu.ac.uk>
> >   "rss patch -- mostly doc, plus English adjustments." on Thu, 13  
> > Jul 2006 02:50:53 +0900,
> >   Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> --- ./lib/rss/dublincore.rb.orig	2006-06-20 12:50:52.000000000 +0100
> >> +++ ./lib/rss/dublincore.rb	2006-07-12 18:34:58.990946000 +0100
> >> @@ -61,7 +61,10 @@
> >>        "language" => nil,
> >>        "relation" => nil,
> >>        "coverage" => nil,
> >> -      "rights" => "rightses" # FIXME
> >> +      "rights" => "rights"   # <FIXME> this refers to a set of  
> >> management rights
> >> +                             # If you add more rights it remains  
> >> plural.
> >> +                             # I can't see anywhere that these  
> >> names must be
> >> +                             # distinct. "deer" => "deer" etc. </ 
> >> FIXME>
> >>      }
> >
> > I rejected the above changes. Because this changes breaks
> > backward compatibility.
> 
> Could this be applied just to HEAD?

No. This changes have two problems. First is that breaks
backward compatibility. Second is that removes convenience
method (obj.dc_rights == obj.dc_rightses[0]).

I have an idea that renaming rightses to rights_values and
providing an alias rightses as rights_values. But I don't
like the name rights_values...


Thanks,
--
kou

In This Thread