[#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:01362] Re: MOre FAQ stuff

From: "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Date: 2000-02-15 03:40:18 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1362
From: Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com>

> "Guy N. Hurst" <gnhurst@hurstlinks.com> writes:
>
> > I just printed out the faq in PDF, and it looks very good, except on the
> > main page
> > the title is cut off on top (may be problem with my printer, though).

I didn't see this problem. Looked fine on my printer. (HP LaserJet 4M)

In fact, the top margin spacing for pages 2 and on was better than what my
old version of Acrobat Distiller produced, which crowded the top edge, and
some minor apparently Distiller-induced glitches disappeared.

In flipping through the new version to see if the same typos were in the old
and new versions (which will be in a subsequent note), the new version
somehow seem nicer to read, even though the fonts and such looked identical.
Puzzling.

Then I had one of my "revelations of the obvious"--it was due to the
indentation of examples.

Well done!

Conrad



In This Thread