[#335632] SOAP - issue with openssl verification failure — Venkat Alla <spinhoo2000@...>

I have the following code in a script that I am trying to use at work -

10 messages 2009/05/01

[#335755] Should I upgrade Ruby from 1.8.5 to 1.8.7? — Cali Wildman <caliwildman2004-info@...>

I just upgraded to Rails 2.3.2 but my Ruby is still 1.8.5. Rails 2.3.2

23 messages 2009/05/04

[#335777] my logroll code, please critique — Derek Smith <derekbellnersmith@...>

My goal is to keep 10 files each at 100Mb. Please critique and suggest

12 messages 2009/05/05

[#335842] '=||' — James Byrne <byrnejb@...>

Can someone point out to me where exactly in the API I find a discussion

18 messages 2009/05/05
[#335843] Re: '=||' — Eleanor McHugh <eleanor@...> 2009/05/05

On 5 May 2009, at 20:51, James Byrne wrote:

[#336031] Superclass of eigenclass — Danny O cuiv <danny.ocuiv@...>

On page 261 of The Ruby Programming Language, they state:

30 messages 2009/05/07
[#336052] Re: Superclass of eigenclass — Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...> 2009/05/07

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Danny O cuiv <danny.ocuiv@gmail.com> wrote:

[#336056] Re: Superclass of eigenclass — Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...> 2009/05/07

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:

[#336061] Ruby memory usage — Pete Hodgson <ruby-forum@...>

Hi Folks,

23 messages 2009/05/07

[#336087] File over tcp? with out using net/ftp — Bigmac Turdsplash <i8igmac@...>

Im trying to send a file back and forth between a client.rb and

12 messages 2009/05/07

[#336160] CGI help — Jeff Leggett <hikerguy@...>

So, I am trying ot read the contents of a file and format the contents

19 messages 2009/05/08

[#336168] ruby string slice/[] w/ range, weird end behavior — Gary Yngve <gary.yngve@...>

First the docs:

17 messages 2009/05/08
[#336169] Re: ruby string slice/[] w/ range, weird end behavior — Eleanor McHugh <eleanor@...> 2009/05/08

On 9 May 2009, at 00:26, Gary Yngve wrote:

[#336205] converting UTF-8 to entities like &#x525B; — Jian Lin <winterheat@...>

15 messages 2009/05/09

[#336385] Any current preprocessor/Ruby language add-ons? — "C. Dagnon" <c-soc-rubyforum@...>

This is kind of a wide-ranging question but for some fairly specific

16 messages 2009/05/12

[#336411] Whaaaaat? — Tom Cloyd <tomcloyd@...>

p [0..5].include? 0

26 messages 2009/05/12

[#336458] what could be improved in Ruby for Science? — Diego Virasoro <Diego.Virasoro@...>

Hello,

20 messages 2009/05/13

[#336505] Syntactic sugar idea — Daniel DeLorme <dan-ml@...42.com>

It seems that often an object will be passed into a block only to invoke

26 messages 2009/05/14
[#336508] Re: [bikeshed] Syntactic sugar idea — Jan <jan.h.xie@...> 2009/05/14

* Daniel DeLorme <dan-ml@dan42.com> [2009-05-14 11:42:31 +0900]:

[#336766] Berkeley DB or Store equivalent? — Mk 27 <halfcountplus@...>

I have never used mySQL because perl's Storable or BerkeleyDB modules

16 messages 2009/05/17

[#336783] permute each element of a ragged array? — Phlip <phlip2005@...>

Rubies:

19 messages 2009/05/17

[#336821] Sorting numbers as strings — Jack Bauer <realmadrid2727@...>

I'm trying to sort some strings containing numbers. The strings

14 messages 2009/05/18

[#336850] Introducing RubyScience on GitHub! — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>

In the tradition of actions vs. words, I present to you:

14 messages 2009/05/18

[#336930] Create an exe with Ruby 1.9.1 — Marc-antoine Kruzik <kadelfek@...>

Hello !

23 messages 2009/05/19

[#336939] Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...>

Greetings, folks. First time poster, so if I breach

235 messages 2009/05/19
[#337016] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@...> 2009/05/20

> ...maybe something like this:

[#337699] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...> 2009/05/28

On May 27, 10:21=A0pm, James Britt <james.br...@gmail.com> wrote:

[#337734] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — James Britt <james.britt@...> 2009/05/28

J Haas wrote:

[#337740] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Juan Zanos <juan_zanos@...> 2009/05/28

On May 28, 2009, at 2:33 PM, James Britt wrote:

[#337745] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...> 2009/05/28

On May 28, 11:15=A0am, Eleanor McHugh <elea...@games-with-brains.com>

[#337954] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Steven Arnold <stevena@...> 2009/05/30

After listening to this debate for some time, the position of allowing

[#338133] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Andy F <andchafow-ruby@...> 2009/06/02

[#338172] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Eleanor McHugh <eleanor@...> 2009/06/02

On 2 Jun 2009, at 06:20, Andy F wrote:

[#337023] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...> 2009/05/20

On May 20, 8:51=A0am, Rick DeNatale <rick.denat...@gmail.com> wrote:

[#337025] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...> 2009/05/20

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM, J Haas <Myrdred@gmail.com> wrote:

[#337045] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...> 2009/05/20

On May 20, 12:25=A0pm, Tony Arcieri <t...@medioh.com> wrote:

[#337581] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — J Haas <Myrdred@...> 2009/05/27

On May 22, 9:01=A0am, Roger Pack <rogerpack2...@gmail.com> wrote:

[#337673] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Juan Zanos <juan_zanos@...> 2009/05/28

[#337686] Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse) — Eleanor McHugh <eleanor@...> 2009/05/28

On 28 May 2009, at 15:06, Juan Zanos wrote:

[#337002] Ruby 1.8 vs. Ruby 1.9 — Calvin <cstephens4@...>

Hi,

17 messages 2009/05/20

[#337094] snailgun-1.0.2 — Brian Candler <b.candler@...>

New experimental project:

18 messages 2009/05/21

[#337115] w00t! Party for Gregory! — pat eyler <pat.eyler@...>

> On May 20, 2009, Gregory Brown wrote:

12 messages 2009/05/21

[#337221] Cryptogram II (#206) — Daniel Moore <yahivin@...>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

17 messages 2009/05/22

[#337323] String concatenation in Ruby — Jagadeesh <mnjagadeesh@...>

Hi,

18 messages 2009/05/25

[#337340] Do you nest classes inside classes? — Mike Stephens <rubfor@...>

Object Orientation is conceptually about a sea of objects interacting

11 messages 2009/05/25

[#337366] Runnin code at a certain time? — Tom Ricks <carrottop123@...>

Hello all,

20 messages 2009/05/25
[#337392] Re: Runnin code at a certain time? — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...> 2009/05/25

On 5/25/09, Tom Ricks <carrottop123@gmail.com> wrote:

[#337413] Other languages to try? — Adam Gardner <adam.oddfellow@...>

So, I've been programming in Ruby for a good while now. Not an expert,

20 messages 2009/05/26

[#337421] Newbie on Threads — Nabs Kahn <nabusman@...>

I'm creating a screen scraping software and I want to have X (let's say

13 messages 2009/05/26
[#337424] Re: Newbie on Threads — Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...> 2009/05/26

2009/5/26 Nabs Kahn <nabusman@gmail.com>:

[#337507] Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Xeno Campanoli <xeno.campanoli@...>

I have the following working with cleartext LDAP:

20 messages 2009/05/26
[#337539] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Brian Candler <b.candler@...> 2009/05/27

Xeno Campanoli wrote:

[#338073] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Xeno Campanoli <xeno.campanoli@...> 2009/06/01

Brian Candler wrote:

[#338082] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Brian Candler <b.candler@...> 2009/06/01

Xeno Campanoli wrote:

[#338084] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Xeno Campanoli <xeno.campanoli@...> 2009/06/01

Brian Candler wrote:

[#338094] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Brian Candler <b.candler@...> 2009/06/01

Xeno Campanoli wrote:

[#338095] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Xeno Campanoli <xeno.campanoli@...> 2009/06/01

Brian Candler wrote:

[#338096] Re: Something Not going with my LDAP using SSL — Xeno Campanoli <xeno.campanoli@...> 2009/06/01

Xeno Campanoli wrote:

[#337574] Installing Ruby 1.9.1 Binary on Windows Vista — Joel Dezenzio <jdezenzio@...>

I've searched and only found one topic which did not have an answer or

27 messages 2009/05/27

[#337671] death toll — deka <rocha.deka@...>

Hi, I am a Brazilian girl and I have a doubt abour numbers in English.

13 messages 2009/05/28

[#337823] Endless Ruby 0.0.2 — Caleb Clausen <vikkous@...>

endless.rb is a pre-processor for ruby which allows you to use python-ish

22 messages 2009/05/29

[#337841] Regular expression — Harry Kakueki <list.push@...>

I want to write a regular expression to do the following.

13 messages 2009/05/29

[#337869] Quine (#207) — Daniel Moore <yahivin@...>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

46 messages 2009/05/29
[#338000] Re: [QUIZ] Quine (#207) — pjb@... (Pascal J. Bourguignon) 2009/05/31

Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> writes:

[#338018] Re: [QUIZ] Quine (#207) — Aureliano Calvo <aurelianocalvo@...> 2009/06/01

I did something like that, but with parenthesis.

[#337899] Requesting Japanese Translation — James Gray <james@...>

I'm adding a little Japanese to a Ruby presentation I am giving. I

13 messages 2009/05/30

[#337961] nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...>

nokogiri version 1.3.0 has been released!

32 messages 2009/05/30
[#337962] Re: nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@...> 2009/05/30

Aaron Patterson wrote:

[#337966] Re: nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2009/05/30

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 06:43:05AM +0900, Roger Pack wrote:

[#337968] Re: nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Iii Iii <bqotatjyujepur@...> 2009/05/30

> gem install nokogiri

[#337985] Re: nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Aaron Patterson <aaron@...> 2009/05/31

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 08:37:54AM +0900, Iii Iii wrote:

[#338049] Re: nokogiri 1.3.0 Released — Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@...> 2009/06/01

Re: Pythonic indentation (or: beating a dead horse)

From: Juan Zanos <juan_zanos@...>
Date: 2009-05-28 14:06:42 UTC
List: ruby-talk #337673
On May 27, 2009, at 12:35 PM, J Haas wrote:

> On May 22, 9:01 am, Roger Pack <rogerpack2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tony's point was that certain constructs, like case statements,  
>> won't be
>> transformable into indentation only blocks.  Does that make sense?
>
> No, it doesn't, because I don't see why case statements are not
> transformable into indent-only blocks. I've _done_ them using the
> quick-and-dirty hacky script and they work just fine. (In cases like
> Joshua's impossible.rb I had to make a minor modification to the
> script to have it inject 'end ' rather than 'end\n', but it still
> worked fine.)
>
> Code speaks louder than words, right? Here's some real-world code...
> it's application_controller.rb from the AuthLogic example (http://
> github.com/binarylogic/authlogic_example/tree):
>
> -----------------
>
> # Filters added to this controller apply to all controllers in the
> application.
> # Likewise, all the methods added will be available for all
> controllers.
>
> class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
> helper :all
> helper_method :current_user_session, :current_user
>
> On May 27, 2009, at 12:35 PM, J Haas wrote:
>
>> On May 22, 9:01 am, Roger Pack <rogerpack2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Tony's point was that certain constructs, like case statements,  
>>> won't be
>>> transformable into indentation only blocks.  Does that make sense?
>>
>> No, it doesn't, because I don't see why case statements are not
>> transformable into indent-only blocks. I've _done_ them using the
>> quick-and-dirty hacky script and they work just fine. (In cases like
>> Joshua's impossible.rb I had to make a minor modification to the
>> script to have it inject 'end ' rather than 'end\n', but it still
>> worked fine.)
>>
>> Code speaks louder than words, right? Here's some real-world code...
>> it's application_controller.rb from the AuthLogic example (http://
>> github.com/binarylogic/authlogic_example/tree):
>>
>> -----------------
>>
>> # Filters added to this controller apply to all controllers in the
>> application.
>> # Likewise, all the methods added will be available for all
>> controllers.
>>
>> class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
>> helper :all
>> helper_method :current_user_session, :current_user
>> filter_parameter_logging :password, :password_confirmation
>>
>> private
>>    def current_user_session
>>      return @current_user_session if defined?(@current_user_session)
>>      @current_user_session = UserSession.find
>>    end
>>
>>    def current_user
>>      return @current_user if defined?(@current_user)
>>      @current_user = current_user_session &&
>> current_user_session.record
>>    end
>>
>>    def require_user
>>      unless current_user
>>        store_location
>>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged in to access this page"
>>        redirect_to new_user_session_url
>>        return false
>>      end
>>    end
>>
>>    def require_no_user
>>      if current_user
>>        store_location
>>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged out to access this page"
>>        redirect_to account_url
>>        return false
>>      end
>>    end
>>
>>    def store_location
>>      session[:return_to] = request.request_uri
>>    end
>>
>>    def redirect_back_or_default(default)
>>      redirect_to(session[:return_to] || default)
>>      session[:return_to] = nil
>>    end
>> end
>>
>> -----------------
>>
>> Nothing particularly special about this code, right? Pretty standard
>> Ruby, if a bit simple? 37 non-blank, non-comment lines, of which 9
>> consist of the bare word "end". I defy anyone to tell me that the  
>> code
>> would be less readable as this:
>>
>> -----------------
>>
>> # Filters added to this controller apply to all controllers in the
>> application.
>> # Likewise, all the methods added will be available for all
>> controllers.
>>
>> class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
>> helper :all
>> helper_method :current_user_session, :current_user
>> filter_parameter_logging :password, :password_confirmation
>>
>> private
>>    def current_user_session:
>>      return @current_user_session if defined?(@current_user_session)
>>      @current_user_session = UserSession.find
>>
>>    def current_user:
>>      return @current_user if defined?(@current_user)
>>      @current_user = current_user_session &&
>> current_user_session.record
>>
>>    def require_user:
>>      unless current_user:
>>        store_location
>>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged in to access this page"
>>        redirect_to new_user_session_url
>>        return false
>>
>>    def require_no_user:
>>      if current_user:
>>        store_location
>>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged out to access this page"
>>        redirect_to account_url
>>        return false
>>
>>    def store_location:
>>      session[:return_to] = request.request_uri
>>
>>    def redirect_back_or_default(default):
>>      redirect_to(session[:return_to] || default)
>>      session[:return_to] = nil
>>
>>
> As this debate unfolds I've watched the stronger criticisms fall  
> apart.  The
> strongest type of criticism would be that it can't be done, or that  
> it's too
> hard to do.  But the impossible examples seem to be defeated fairly  
> easily.
> Moreover, the solutions are backward compatible to existing Ruby.
>
> Now when I look at this latest example I see some ordinary code  
> that's 44 lines
> long.  With the pythonic scheme it looks like it's only 35 lines  
> long.  I find
> it difficult to convince myself that it's a good idea to make code  
> 25% larger
> just to preserve some ends of dubious value.
>
> I suppose I could try to come up with some nonsense argument that  
> 'end' makes
> everything more readable.  But that would just be prejudice.  It's  
> trivially
> easy to read.  It can't just be me.  There seems to be no shortage  
> of Python
> folk who have no problem either.  Objectively, being forced to  
> explicitly type
> 'end' all the time seems to takes up a whole lot of space.
>
> filter_parameter_logging :password, :password_confirmation
>
> private
>    def current_user_session
>      return @current_user_session if defined?(@current_user_session)
>      @current_user_session = UserSession.find
>    end
>
>    def current_user
>      return @current_user if defined?(@current_user)
>      @current_user = current_user_session &&
> current_user_session.record
>    end
>
>    def require_user
>      unless current_user
>        store_location
>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged in to access this page"
>        redirect_to new_user_session_url
>        return false
>      end
>    end
>
>    def require_no_user
>      if current_user
>        store_location
>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged out to access this page"
>        redirect_to account_url
>        return false
>      end
>    end
>
>    def store_location
>      session[:return_to] = request.request_uri
>    end
>
>    def redirect_back_or_default(default)
>      redirect_to(session[:return_to] || default)
>      session[:return_to] = nil
>    end
> end
>
> -----------------
>
> Nothing particularly special about this code, right? Pretty standard
> Ruby, if a bit simple? 37 non-blank, non-comment lines, of which 9
> consist of the bare word "end". I defy anyone to tell me that the code
> would be less readable as this:
>
> -----------------
>
> # Filters added to this controller apply to all controllers in the
> application.
> # Likewise, all the methods added will be available for all
> controllers.
>
> class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
> helper :all
> helper_method :current_user_session, :current_user
> filter_parameter_logging :password, :password_confirmation
>
> private
>    def current_user_session:
>      return @current_user_session if defined?(@current_user_session)
>      @current_user_session = UserSession.find
>
>    def current_user:
>      return @current_user if defined?(@current_user)
>      @current_user = current_user_session &&
> current_user_session.record
>
>    def require_user:
>      unless current_user:
>        store_location
>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged in to access this page"
>        redirect_to new_user_session_url
>        return false
>
>    def require_no_user:
>      if current_user:
>        store_location
>        flash[:notice] = "You must be logged out to access this page"
>        redirect_to account_url
>        return false
>
>    def store_location:
>      session[:return_to] = request.request_uri
>
>    def redirect_back_or_default(default):
>      redirect_to(session[:return_to] || default)
>      session[:return_to] = nil
>
>
As I've watched this debate unfold I've watched the stronger  
criticisms fall
apart.  The strongest type of criticism would be that it can't be  
done, or that
it's too hard to be done.  But the impossible examples seem to be  
defeated
fairly easily.   Moreover, the solutions are backward compatible to  
existing
Ruby.

Now when I look at this latest example I see some ordinary code that's  
44 lines
long.  With the pythonic scheme it looks like it's only 35 lines  
long.  I find
it difficult to convince myself that it's a good idea to make code 25%  
larger
just to preserve some ends of dubious value.

I suppose I could try to come up with some nonsense argument that  
'end' makes
everything more readable.  But that would just be prejudice.  The  
pythonic
example is trivially easy to read.  It can't just be me.  There seems  
to be no
shortage of Python folk who have no problem.   Objectively, the ends  
just take
up a whole lot of space.


In This Thread