[#955] Ruby 1.4.3 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Ruby 1.4.3 is out, check out:
1 message
1999/12/07
[#961] Ruby compileable by C++ compiler? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Hi,
8 messages
1999/12/10
[#962] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#963] Re: Ruby compileable by C++ compiler?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
1999/12/10
Wei,
[#964] Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Hi,
15 messages
1999/12/10
[#966] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— nakajima kengo<ringo@...>
1999/12/10
Hello Clemens,
[#967] Re: Bastion or SecurityManager for Ruby?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
1999/12/10
Hi,
[#989] a question about to_i — Friedrich Dominicus <Friedrich.Dominicus@...>
Sorry, I'm quite new to ruby. But I encounterd the following problem. If
17 messages
1999/12/19
[ruby-talk:01014] Blocks, Procs, and iterators
From:
Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Date:
1999-12-31 13:41:38 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #1014
Hi, Dave Thomas writes: > > Is there a difference between > > def fred > yield 1 > yield 2 > end > > and > > def fred(&block) > block.call(1) > block.call(2) > end > > AFAIK --if I have understood matz right-- there is only a performance penalty by using your second example. That is, as a block has to converted into a Proc instance *and*then* passed over to the method. A further penalty has to be added for every call, as yield'ing a block is faster than call'ing a Proc instance! > Curious of Dallas... > BTW: Best wishes for 2000 to all of the Ruby community and you families & friends & ... :-))) \cle -- Clemens Hintze mailto: c.hintze@gmx.net