[#1026] Is this a bug? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
18 messages
2000/01/03
[#1053] rand() / drand48() — ts <decoux@...>
11 messages
2000/01/05
[#1055] Re: rand() / drand48()
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2000/01/05
[#1061] Re: rand() / drand48()
— gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro)
2000/01/07
Hi,
[#1067] Here docs not skipping leading spaces — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
5 messages
2000/01/08
[#1083] YADQ (Yet Another Dumb Question) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
12 messages
2000/01/10
[#1084] Infinite loop — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
17 messages
2000/01/11
[#1104] The value of while... — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
24 messages
2000/01/11
[#1114] Re: The value of while...
— Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
2000/01/12
matz@netlab.co.jp (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:
[#1128] Re: The value of while... — David Suarez de Lis <excalibor@...>
Hi all,
1 message
2000/01/12
[#1133] Re: Class variables... — David Suarez de Lis <excalibor@...>
Hi there,
2 messages
2000/01/12
[#1158] Is this expected behavior? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
6 messages
2000/01/21
[#1172] Re: Possible bug in ruby-man-1.4 — Huayin Wang <wang@...>
> |Well, I guess it comes down to what you mean by an integer
10 messages
2000/01/24
[#1177] Re: Possible bug in ruby-man-1.4
— Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
2000/01/25
matz@netlab.co.jp (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:
[#1188] Enumerable and index — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
5 messages
2000/01/27
[#1193] Semantics of chomp/chop — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
7 messages
2000/01/28
[#1197] Question about 'open' — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
8 messages
2000/01/30
[ruby-talk:01154] Re: The value of while...
From:
Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Date:
2000-01-17 09:24:45 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #1154
Yukihiro Matsumoto writes:
> Hi,
>
> In message "[ruby-talk:01152] Re: The value of while..."
> on 00/01/17, Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@gmx.net> writes:
>
...
> Maybe easy-to-understand expressive documents in BETTER English will
> help reduce misunderstanding. Ok, we should better work on publishing
> the Ruby Book in English.
:-)))
>
> |No! The most Perlers was astonishly silent. They tends to be more
> |noisy if discussing Python in theirs group.
>
> I guess comp.lang.perl.misc is too noisy to discuss about other
> languages.
Ehrm ... I have meant, that normally comp.lang.perl... will be very
noisy, but this time (about Ruby) they was more-or-less silent.
> | But after matz' |announcement of Ruby there was only some (1-4)
> posts with contents |like: Oh no! Yet another language... :-) But
> I've got positive comments from Tim Peters and few others.
That was comp.lang.python. And there it is exactly oppposite. They are
open and more-and-less silent about other languages; except that other
language is called Perl ;-)
BTW: It was the positive comment from a Pythoner that had lead me to
Ruby :-)
>
> matz.
\cle