From: Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
Date: 2006-07-24T05:03:53+09:00
Subject: Re: [YAY] my sandboxing extension!!

--8323328-453379889-1153684976=:30944
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-453379889-1153684976=:30944"

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323328-453379889-1153684976=:30944
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On 7/23/06, Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
>>    VALUE foo =3D rb_funcall((VALUE)3,rb_intern("<<"),INT2NUM(n));

> Yuck, that's really nasty

Thank you! If you can't think of a better solution, don't call it nasty.

A solution not running in O(n) can't be called better, and I can't think=20
of anything else in O(n), can you?

The only way that direct modification of the result of << could hurt is if=
=20
some Ruby of the future doesn't make it always return a new object=20
anymore. I can't see that happen any time soon.

> (INT2FIX() is sufficient, though).

If you mean vs INT2NUM, this hardly makes any difference.

If you mean (VALUE)3, I don't know why I didn't write INT2NUM(1) or=20
INT2FIX(1) instead, but as it is, it doesn't make any difference either.

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard - t=E9l:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju
| Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montr=E9al QC Canada
--8323328-453379889-1153684976=:30944--
--8323328-453379889-1153684976=:30944--