From: Scott Baldwin Date: 2006-08-22T16:25:22+09:00 Subject: Re: Dir.bitbucket? On 8/22/06, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote: > On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Daniel Berger wrote: > > > nobu@ruby-lang.org wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> At Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:21:05 +0900, > >> Rick DeNatale wrote in [ruby-talk:209686]: > >> > >>> And, since we're effectively looking for a write-only file, it seems > >>> that it would be better to make the implementation pure Ruby and > >>> platform independent, sort of like a StringIO without a string, > >>> instead of on platform specific blackholes like /dev/null or the > >>> others. Then it wouldn't need to change if and when a new platform > >>> was to be supported. > >>> > >> > >> It doesn't work with child processes, which would be expected > >> in many cases. > >> > >> I wonder if the name bitbucket is nice. > >> > >> > > Dir.bitbucket > > Dir.devnull > > Dir.null_device > > Dir.null > > Dir.black_hole > > > > I guess I'm leaning towards Dir.null_device in terms of most technically > > descriptive. It doesn't quite roll off the tongue as nicely as "bitbucket", > > though. :) > > > > Regards, > > > > Dan > > why 'Dir' though? why not File? > > -a > -- > to foster inner awareness, introspection, and reasoning is more efficient than > meditation and prayer. > - h.h. the 14th dali lama > > Agreed. File would be a better location for the it.