[#1263] Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

33 messages 2000/02/08

[#1376] Re: Scripting versus programming — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

Conrad writes:

13 messages 2000/02/15

[#1508] Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...>

17 messages 2000/02/19
[#1544] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/02/23

Hello Ian,

[#1550] Re: Ruby/GTK and the mainloop — Ian Main <imain@...> 2000/02/23

On Wed, Feb 23, 2000 at 02:56:10AM -0500, Yasushi Shoji wrote:

[#1516] Ruby: PLEASE use comp.lang.misc for all Ruby programming/technical questions/discussions!!!! — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>

((FYI: This was sent to the Ruby mail list.))

10 messages 2000/02/19

[#1569] Re: Ruby: constructors, new and initialise — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article

12 messages 2000/02/25

[ruby-talk:01230] Re: A vote for old behavior

From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2000-02-03 23:59:40 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1230
Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:01229] A vote for old behavior"
    on 00/02/03, Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> writes:

|Could I put in a vote for a return to the old behavior of 'gsub!' ?

Method chain like `str.gsub!(pat,repl).gsub!(pat,repl)' is error
prone, I think.  That's why I changed the behavior.

|Sometimes it's nice to be able to write
|
|  1 while gsub!(....)
|
|(for example while matching nested syntactical constructs)

  1 while gsub!(...) && $~
                    ^^^^^^
is a workaround for this case.

							matz.
p.s.
cvs.netlab.co.jp will be closed on Saturday (+900).

In This Thread