[#10209] Market for XML Web stuff — Matt Sergeant <matt@...>

I'm trying to get a handle on what the size of the market for AxKit would be

15 messages 2001/02/01

[#10238] RFC: RubyVM (long) — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

Hi,

20 messages 2001/02/01
[#10364] Re: RFC: RubyVM (long) — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2001/02/05

[#10708] Suggestion for threading model — Stephen White <spwhite@...>

I've been playing around with multi-threading. I notice that there are

11 messages 2001/02/11

[#10853] Re: RubyChangeRequest #U002: new proper name for Hash#indexes, Array#indexes — "Mike Wilson" <wmwilson01@...>

10 messages 2001/02/14

[#11037] to_s and << — "Brent Rowland" <tarod@...>

list = [1, 2.3, 'four', false]

15 messages 2001/02/18

[#11094] Re: Summary: RCR #U002 - proper new name fo r indexes — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

12 messages 2001/02/19

[#11131] Re: Summary: RCR #U002 - proper new name fo r indexes — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneik@...>

Robert Feldt wrote:

10 messages 2001/02/19

[#11251] Programming Ruby is now online — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

36 messages 2001/02/21

[#11469] XML-RPC and KDE — schuerig@... (Michael Schuerig)

23 messages 2001/02/24
[#11490] Re: XML-RPC and KDE — schuerig@... (Michael Schuerig) 2001/02/24

Michael Neumann <neumann@s-direktnet.de> wrote:

[#11491] Negative Reviews for Ruby and Programming Ruby — Jim Freeze <jim@...> 2001/02/24

Hi all:

[#11633] RCR: shortcut for instance variable initialization — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

13 messages 2001/02/26

[#11652] RE: RCR: shortcut for instance variable initialization — Michael Davis <mdavis@...>

I like it!

14 messages 2001/02/27

[#11700] Starting Once Again — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

OK, I'm starting again with Ruby. I'm just assuming that I've

31 messages 2001/02/27
[#11712] RE: Starting Once Again — "Aaron Hinni" <aaron@...> 2001/02/27

> 2. So far I think running under TextPad will be better than running

[#11726] Re: Starting Once Again — Aleksi Niemel<zak@...> 2001/02/28

On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Aaron Hinni wrote:

[ruby-talk:11576] Re: Array bugs?

From: "Christoph Rippel" <crippel@...>
Date: 2001-02-26 07:59:49 UTC
List: ruby-talk #11576
> From: Ben Tilly [mailto:ben_tilly@hotmail.com]
[...]
> The key difference is the addition of the checks for
> @@other_seen.  If you don't have that, then you get
> different results for this case:
> 
>     a = ["hello"]
>     b = (1..3).map {|x| a}
>     c = (1..3).map {|x| ["hello"])
>     p (b == c)
>     p (c == b)
> 
> Note that currently Ruby says these are equal.  With
> the method above Ruby says that they are different.
> Compare though what these two do:
> 
>     b[0].push "world"
>     c[0].push "world"
> 
> I think that calling them unequal is quite reasonable.
No Ben this is not reasonable (practical at least;-)
standard (ruby gives you)
------------------
[["hello"], ["hello"], ["hello"]]
[["hello"], ["hello"], ["hello"]]
"Now equal"
true
------------------
a = ["hello"]
b = (1..3).map {|x| a}
c = (1..3).map {|x| ["hello"]}

p b,c
p "Now equal", (b == c)
-----------------
Plenty of code relies on the  " b == c" semantics  - 
if you would change this all hell would break loose.

[...]
Christoph  


In This Thread

Prev Next