From: Patrick Hurley Date: 2006-08-08T20:56:20+09:00 Subject: Re: ANN: ruby-snarl On 8/8/06, Mikko Lehtonen wrote: > Ah, excellent, didn't know about snarl, with ruby bindings it might be > really useful. My thoughts exactly -- it (snarl), is poorly publicized, but seems stable and useful. > I'd like clarification in the rdoc that zero timeout is the same as > infinite timeout (maybe a constant for it even?) Fixed in docs and added a NO_TIMEOUT constant. > And the update method doesn't check for the icon being nil before > trying to expand the path, so I can't give nil for it (which is > actually the default) Fixed -- this is why I need tests and this at least I can test for -- I will add some interface tests today. > Also the examples 2-4 seem to use a number for the icons, but again, > it tries to expand the path and fails. I guess it's supposed to be the > timeout? Yup, initially I did not support icons, the examples will be fixed later today. > Otherwise it seems perfect, thank you for it =) You are very welcome, thanks for finding my rough edges pth