[#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:01405] Re: Bignum aset

From: gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro)
Date: 2000-02-15 22:31:11 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1405
Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:01403] Re: Bignum aset"
    on 00/02/15, Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> writes:
>     a = 2**100
>     b = 2**100
>     p a
>     p b
>     p a.id
>     p b.id
>     1267650600228229401496703205376
>     1267650600228229401496703205376
>     537680696
>     537680476
>
>
>I thought that only Fixnums were immediate.

Well, immediate and immutable are independent concept each other.
Immediate value is an implementation technic only at least on Ruby but
the immutableness is one of properties of objects.  I thinks integers
are immutable even if non-immediate because I consider a numeric is
free from its representation and integer[n] is an abbreviation of

  (("%b" % integer)[-1-n] || ?0).chr.to_i

But I may be wrong.  Your openion is reasonable if most users consider
that a numeric is a bit container. 

-- gotoken

In This Thread