From: Nicholas Van Weerdenburg <vanweerd@...>
Date: 2005-01-19T13:31:35+09:00
Subject: Re: Webrick, erb, and .rhtml

Is there an ERBOUT? How about doing:

$stdout_default=$stdout   # or STDOUT
$stdout=ERBOUT

This works for $stdout=$stderr, but I haven't tried it with erb.

Nick

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:36:06 +0900, Charles Comstock <cc1@cec.wustl.edu> wrote:
> Martin DeMello wrote:
> > Belorion <belorion@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>That's tough luck for me then.  I have a significantly large rhtml
> >>project that uses lots of puts and print because that works fine in
> >>Apache/eRuby/mod_ruby.  Guess I have a lot of busy work ahead of me,
> >>changing all my puts/prints to <%= "" %> if I want to support Webrick
> >>serving.  Thanks for the help!
> >
> >
> > Would simply overriding 'puts' and 'print' to return what they print
> > work? That way you only need to change <% to <%= .
> >
> > martin
> 
> Why is it that erb doesn't override kernel puts and print so they go to
> ERBOUT instead of STDOUT.  That way you wouldn't get weird orderings
> when you use them and it would make more sense.  If you actually want to
> print output to stdout or anything like that then you explicitly call
> STDOUT.print or .puts.  I think alot of people assume that print and
> puts output in the same interlaced order as the <% and <%= blocks, but
> they really don't.  Does anyone have a good reason why this should not
> be the case?
>         Charles Comstock
> 
> 


-- 
Nicholas Van Weerdenburg