[#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:01335] Re: Draft of the updated Ruby FAQ

From: "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Date: 2000-02-14 02:55:48 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1335
From: Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com>

> "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@jump.net> writes:

> > It's a minor thing, but I always
> > appreciate having the detailed last modification date/time on printed
> > documents. (I was going to report that the domain/path information was
> > missing on your Postscript file link, but I noticed that you have that
fixed
> > now.)
>
> I wasn't going to start versioning it until it was released - I was
> hoping for some form of blessing before I released it on an
> unsuspecting world. I also wasn;t sure what we should do about
> updates--do I just make changes as I see fit, or does the group get to
> veto things>

Looks to me like it already has been provisionally blessed and officially
released (i.e. "new better FAQ is available" link on www.ruby-lang.org home
page), although I can appreciate your concerns.

> > Is there any chance of posting a PDF file in addition to the Postscript
> > file? PDF is generally much more convenient for Win 98/NT users (and
maybe
> > also for many Unix users with Acrobat Reader plug-ins as well too).
>
> Depending on the fonts, I _should_ be able to generate a decent
> looking PDF. Before I do that, though, I want to spend time getting it
> to look nicer. And time is something that seems to pass by quicker and
> quicker at the moment. Anyway, I _will_ look at all this sometime next
> week.

Understand. No rush. Thanks.

> I'll probably also move the faq to it's final resting place.

? (i.e. "new better FAQ is available" link on www.ruby-lang.org home page.)

> > I have the previous version of Distiller, so I can produce PDF files
from
> > Postscript files as a last resort--in fact I'm printing off the PDF
version
> > as I type.
>
> OK - if I have no luck here I may use you as the FAQtory for pdf.
>
> Thanks

You're welcome. (Liked your FAQsimilie of a pun.)

Conrad



In This Thread