[#13775] Problems with racc rule definitions — Michael Neumann <neumann@...>

15 messages 2001/04/17
[#13795] Re: Problems with racc rule definitions — Minero Aoki <aamine@...> 2001/04/18

Hi,

[#13940] From Guido, with love... — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

52 messages 2001/04/20

[#13953] regexp — James Ponder <james@...>

Hi, I'm new to ruby and am coming from a perl background - therefore I

19 messages 2001/04/21

[#14033] Distributed Ruby and heterogeneous networks — harryo@... (Harry Ohlsen)

I wrote my first small distributed application yesterday and it worked

15 messages 2001/04/22

[#14040] RCR: getClassFromString method — ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)

It would be nice to have a function that returns a class type given a

20 messages 2001/04/22

[#14130] Re: Ruby mascot proposal — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneik@...>

Guy N. Hurst wrote:

21 messages 2001/04/24
[#14148] Re: Ruby mascot proposal — Stephen White <spwhite@...> 2001/04/24

On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Conrad Schneiker wrote:

[#14188] Re: Ruby mascot proposal — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2001/04/25

Hi,

[#14193] Re: Ruby mascot proposal — "W. Kent Starr" <elderburn@...> 2001/04/25

On Tuesday 24 April 2001 23:02, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#14138] Re: python on the smalltalk VM — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>

FYI: Thought this might be of interest to the JRuby and Ruby/GUI folks.

27 messages 2001/04/24
[#14153] Re: python on the smalltalk VM — Andrew Kuchling <akuchlin@...> 2001/04/24

Conrad Schneiker <schneik@austin.ibm.com> writes:

[#14154] array#flatten! question — Jim Freeze <jim@...> 2001/04/24

Hello.

[#14159] Can I insert into an array — Jim Freeze <jim@...> 2001/04/24

Ok, this may be a dumb question, but, is it possible to insert into an

[#14162] Re: Can I insert into an array — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2001/04/24

Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> writes:

[#14289] RCR: Array#insert — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2001/04/27

At Wed, 25 Apr 2001 01:28:36 +0900,

[#14221] An or in an if. — Tim Pettman <tjp@...>

Hi there,

18 messages 2001/04/25

[#14267] Re: Ruby mascot proposal — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneik@...>

Danny van Bruggen,

16 messages 2001/04/26

[#14452] How to do it the Ruby-way 3 — Stefan Matthias Aust <sma@3plus4.de>

First a question: Why is

21 messages 2001/04/30

[ruby-talk:13891] Re: EBADF on Windows

From: Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@...>
Date: 2001-04-19 21:10:03 UTC
List: ruby-talk #13891
Thanks, Bernard!

I had gotten as far as "echo off", but "@echo off" is much better :).

I'm being dragged kickin and screamin into the nightmare world of DOS
batch files...

I also found that %* works like $* in unix shells.

BTW, if anyone is interested, what I'm working on is some scripts for
setting up montecarlo runs of simulations, and doing some post
processing of log files. The simulation itself is done by some
user-specified program. I'll package this up for distribution
eventually, but for now, you can get my "extract" utility from

	http://path.berkeley.edu/~vjoel/extract

Briefly, if your log file is columns of numbers with a header line
prviding variable names, extract lets you use ruby expressions in those
variables to select and process lines into a new file. Kinda like awk,
but easier for novices to do simple things.

"Bernard Delm馥" wrote:
> 
> Joel,
> 
> this definitely is *not* ruby-related, for I have seen similar
> anomalies with perl and python. Apparently, when Windows relies
> on a script's extension to guess which interpreter to run it
> through, it doesn't properly take IO redirection into account.
> You can circumvent this with a small, "driver" batch file, though:
> 
> ----file mytest.rb----
> print "foo\n"
> ----file mytest.bat----
> @echo off
> ruby.exe mytest.rb %1 %2 %3 %4 %5
> --------------------
> C:\TEMP> mytest.bat > mytest.out
> C:\TEMP> type mytest.out
> foo
> 
> > Why would 'test.rb' and 'ruby test.rb' behave differently? Something I
> > don't understand about DOS (very possible :) ?
> 
> Well, neither do I!
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> Bernard.
> 
> PS: the above holds true on NT4, but I just checked on Win2000,
> to discover that the problem simply does not exist on this platform.
> Ah, finally a compelling reason to upgrade: the Redmontians fixed
> their command-line interpreter!

--
Joel VanderWerf                          California PATH, UC Berkeley
mailto:vjoel@path.berkeley.edu                     Ph. (510) 231-9446
http://www.path.berkeley.edu                       FAX (510) 231-9512

In This Thread