[#1649] Re: New Ruby projects — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
6 messages
2000/03/01
[#1672] Re: Ruby 1.4 stable manual bug? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
5 messages
2000/03/02
[#1673] Re: Possible problem with ext/socket in 1.5.2 — itojun@...
6 messages
2000/03/02
[#1694] Conventions for our Ruby book — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
9 messages
2000/03/02
[#1715] Install postgresql support — Ikhlasul Amal <amal@...>
Hi all,
7 messages
2000/03/04
[#1717] Re: Install postgresql support
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2000/03/04
Hi,
[#1786] Is this a bug? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
(mailed & posted)
3 messages
2000/03/09
[#1814] Objects nested sometimes. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
I am attemptiong to write a package which consists of a workspace
5 messages
2000/03/14
[#1816] Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
Hi all,
17 messages
2000/03/14
[#1824] Re: Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2000/03/14
Hi,
[#1829] Re: Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
2000/03/15
Yukihiro Matsumoto writes:
[#1830] Re: Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2000/03/15
Hi,
[#1879] Re: Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)?
— Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>
2000/03/16
Hi,
[#1834] enum examples? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Has anyone any examplse of using the Enumerable module? I've had a
9 messages
2000/03/15
[#1844] Minor irritation, can't figure out how to patch it though! — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
I was considering how difficult it would be to patch Ruby to accept
6 messages
2000/03/15
[#1889] [ruby-1.5.3] require / SAFE — ts <decoux@...>
9 messages
2000/03/16
[#1896] Ruby Syntax similar to other languages? — "David Douthitt" <DDouthitt@...>
12 messages
2000/03/16
[#1954] Re: Ruby Syntax similar to other languages?
— "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
2000/03/17
From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@netlab.co.jp>
[#1900] Enumerations and all that. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Thank you to the people who responded to my questions about Enumerated
7 messages
2000/03/16
[#1902] Re: Enumerations and all that.
— Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
2000/03/16
Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
[#1905] Re: Enumerations and all that.
— Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
2000/03/16
On 16 Mar 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#1929] Re: Class Variables — "David Douthitt" <DDouthitt@...>
| "David Douthitt" <DDouthitt@cuna.com> writes:
5 messages
2000/03/16
[#1942] no Fixnum#new ? — Quinn Dunkan <quinn@...>
Ok, I can add methods to a built-in class well enough (yes I know about succ,
6 messages
2000/03/17
[#1989] English Ruby/Gtk Tutorial? — schneik@...
18 messages
2000/03/17
[#1992] Re: English Ruby/Gtk Tutorial?
— Hiroshi IGARASHI <igarashi@...>
2000/03/18
Hi,
[#2022] rb_global_entry — ts <decoux@...>
7 messages
2000/03/19
[#2036] Anonymous and Singleton Classes — B_DAVISON <Bob.Davison@...>
I am a Ruby newbie and having some problems getting my mind around certain
5 messages
2000/03/20
[#2069] Ruby/GTK+ question about imlib --> gdk-pixbug — schneik@...
4 messages
2000/03/21
[#2073] Re: eval.rb fails — "Dat Nguyen" <thucdat@...>
The doc is fine, this happens only if you try to execute 'until' block
6 messages
2000/03/22
[#2074] Re: eval.rb fails
— Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
2000/03/22
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000, Dat Nguyen wrote:
[#2084] Scope violated by import via 'require'? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Hi,
5 messages
2000/03/22
[#2104] ARGF or $< — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Has anyone any examples of how to use ARGF or $< as I cannot find much
8 messages
2000/03/23
[#2105] Re: ARGF or $<
— ARIMA Yasuhiro <fit0298@...>
2000/03/23
Hi.
[#2165] Ruby strict mode and stand-alone executables. — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Some people want Ruby to have a strict compile mode.
5 messages
2000/03/25
[#2203] Re: parse bug in 1.5 — schneik@...
5 messages
2000/03/28
[#2212] Re: Ruby/Glade usage questions. — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "m" == mrilu <mrilu@ale.cx> writes:
6 messages
2000/03/28
[#2241] setter() for local variables — ts <decoux@...>
18 messages
2000/03/29
[#2256] Multiple assignment of pattern match results. — schneik@...
5 messages
2000/03/30
[#2267] Re: Ruby and Eiffel — h.fulton@...
7 messages
2000/03/30
[#2309] Question about attribute writers — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
10 messages
2000/03/31
[#2317] Re: Question about attribute writers
— Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
2000/03/31
Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@gmx.net> writes:
[ruby-talk:01709] Re: Ruby 1.4 stable manual bug?
From:
Toshiro Kuwabara <toshirok@...3.so-net.ne.jp>
Date:
2000-03-03 17:24:50 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #1709
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:01708] Re: Ruby 1.4 stable manual bug?"
on 00/03/03, Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
>> I've written a document of RD format, here.
>> <URL:http://www2.pos.to/~tosh/ruby/rdtool/rd-draft.rd>
>> and this is HTML version.
>> <URL:http://www2.pos.to/~tosh/ruby/rdtool/rd-draft.html>
>
>This looks interesting. I will put comments at the end.
Thanks.
>> But We, and RD, cannot accept your idea because it is not fit
>> with RD's policy and its goal.
>>
>> We decided to use the syntax like plain text for RD. And we think
>> it is wishable for RD to seem as same as plain text. RD format should
>> be ordered same as it is desplayed because this rule is simple.
>
>There is definately something to be said for simplicity. The only other
>thing that occurs to me is that "plain text" is slightly different for you
>and for me :-) -- what do you think about a language directive in RD,
>which pod also doesn't have, so one can set the RD reader to Japanese,
>English, Esperanto or whatever? It would then simply pick out the
>appropriate parts, and display those as plain text.
Sorry, I might confuse you by my breif, too breif, explanation possiblly.
RD's target, i.e. user, is a man such like:
* He is a Ruby Programmer. He love Ruby, he also love programing.
* He doesn't like writting documents. Ofcourse, he understand how
his users need documents. But, he love programing so much that
, he think , he have no time to write document.
* He knows HTML. He also knows LaTeX system. At least, he can write
HTML formated document by his hands. But he don't like HTML. He
think HTML is too complicated for him to write documents of his
Ruby script.
RD's goal is "to make him write documents". So RD must be attractive
for him, a lazy Ruby hacker.:-)
Why he don't like HTML? Why he think HTML doesn't fit for writting
document of his Ruby script?
I think that because:
* He is enough lazy, so he want not to write such like "<HTML>...</HTML>"
or something. When he write document, he want to write document itself,
not to write something like HTML tag. He want to concentrate to his
document itself.
* HTML can easily split document and bury it into its tag syntax, I
think. While he own his script, add new future to it and fix bugs of
it, his document is still alive. He must fix his document again and
again. So, HTML doesn't fit with documentation of his script.
RD have to help him. So, RD's directive is:
:easy to read, easy to write
* He must read his document which he wrote 3 month ago, when he
up-to-date it. He don't need to read so detail, but he must
grasp it and find out where he must change. He read RD itself,
not HTML formatted document which rdtool generates. So,
"easy to read" is a great point for "easy to write".
* It is why we select "plain text like" format for RD. I think,
we (and "he") are familiar with plain text, so we grasp easily
structures of documents in "plain text like" format.
* I think, the appearance of plain text format represents structure
of document. (NOTE: this "appearance" doesn't mean "decoration". )
If you write a block indented, such like:
class Foo
def bar
...
end
end
it will mean "this block is a cited text block or program code".
And if you write lines with mark like "*", such like:
* A list
* ...
it will mean "a list, unordered list". We use such notation again
and again in our real life, in books, in lecture notebooks and in
our daily memos. So, we can understand easily structure of document
in plain-text.
:easy to learn, keep it simple
He wants not to study so much about mark-up language. Ofcourse,
LaTeX is good system, but it is too complicated for his usage.
LaTeX is something like a programing language. He doesn't want such
system. He want "to write document"! So we will keep RD simple.
He doesn't want more. He doesn't want fully-automated documentation
system. He doesn't want publishing-level printing system. He only
wants simple but easy-to-write document format.
OK, now return to your suggestion.
"Order" is very big point for document structure. If you read the last
chapter of a book first, and read first chapter last, you will be
confused, maybe. When he fix 3-month-ago document, he will read RD and
will be confused, because that RD is written with defferent order from
HTML file which rdtool generates from that RD.
Especially plain-text-like format is sensitive to order, so your suggestion
is not fit with RD, I think.
Different man hopes different thing. Each writes document with different
style from other. Natural language is much more diffcult than programing
language, so each learns his own style of writting for natural language.
I understand how different they (we) think what is "wishable". But we
can't stuff everything into RD. So, I want each users to write his own
script which help him to write RD in your style, instead of
fully-featured RD.
>> If you want to write RD document like your idea, you can write easily
>> a script to convert your style of document into canonical RD.
>
>I could use the <<< include feature for some of this.
Yes.
>Having looked at the document, there are a few things I am not clear
>about.
> Headline: What is the intended difference in meaning between "=" and
> "+"? Is it always to be treated as a font size difference? Are
> "=" "==" and "===" be regarded as structure like HTML's <H1> <H2>
> and <H3>, and is it forbidden to render these as different sizes?
Yes simply section size difference. "=" is bigger, "+" is smaller.
HTML equivalent is:
= H1
== H2
=== H3
==== H4
+ H5
++ H6
We don't decide "decoration". So it is free to render it with any size,
any font face and any color.
> Inlines: Examples of how these might be rendered would be helpful.
> I suggest you show them embedded in a Textblock. Oh, I have
> just looked at the rd form of the document, and this is clear.
Oh, thank you for idea.
Now we decide we can use Inline at term of DescList. So, I must fix
Inline section of this document. I fix that point at the same time.
> Given that the indentation is used for structure, is it intended that
> a Textblock at the Baseline level of indent should never have its lines
> folded when displayed, or is folding permitted?
OK. When it desplayed, RD doesn't restrict such "decoration" anyhow.
We decide only that RD's "appearance" represents structure of document.
We don't decide about output of RD formatter. But HTML have its own rule,
LaTeX also have its own rule, so output of RD formatter must be equivalent
of original RD in symantics.
> You have the sentence: "RD is one of them, but RD will be a standard
> one." I am not sure what you mean by this. Is it that several
> document standards can be supported in one file, or will there be
> dialects of RD for different situations?
Well, this means ...
ruby, Ruby interpreter, regards embeded document with very simple way.
it simply ignore text between "=begin" and "=end". So, if you want, you
can embed other format document, for exsample HTML, in your Ruby script.
... So, "RD is one of them". OK?
Suggestions and Questions are always welcome. :-)
---
Tosh
Toshiro Kuwabara