[#33161] Call/CC and Ruby iterators. — olczyk@... (Thaddeus L Olczyk)

Reading about call/cc in Scheme I get the impression that it is very

11 messages 2002/02/05

[#33242] favicon.ico — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

19 messages 2002/02/06
[#33256] Re: favicon.ico — Leon Torres <leon@...> 2002/02/06

[#33435] Reg: tiny contest: who's faster? (add_a_gram) — grady@... (Steven Grady)

> My current solution works correctly with various inputs.

17 messages 2002/02/08

[#33500] Ruby Embedded Documentation — William Djaja Tjokroaminata <billtj@...>

Hi,

24 messages 2002/02/10
[#33502] Re: Ruby Embedded Documentation — "Lyle Johnson" <ljohnson@...> 2002/02/10

> Now, I am using Ruby on Linux, and I have downloaded Ruby version

[#33615] Name resolution in Ruby — stern@... (Alan Stern)

I've been struggling to understand how name resolution is supposed to

16 messages 2002/02/11

[#33617] choice of HTML templating system — Paul Brannan <paul@...>

I am not a web developer, nor do I pretend to be one.

23 messages 2002/02/11

[#33619] make first letter lowercase — sebi@... (sebi)

hello,

20 messages 2002/02/11
[#33620] Re: [newbie] make first letter lowercase — Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@...> 2002/02/11

sebi wrote:

[#33624] Re: [newbie] make first letter lowercase — "Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan" <jeffp@...> 2002/02/11

On Feb 11, Tobias Reif said:

[#33632] Re: [newbie] make first letter lowercase — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2002/02/12

[#33731] simple XML parsing (greedy / non-greedy — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

Suppose I had this text

14 messages 2002/02/13

[#33743] qualms about respond_to? idiom — David Alan Black <dblack@...>

Hi --

28 messages 2002/02/13
[#33751] Re: qualms about respond_to? idiom — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2002/02/13

David Alan Black <dblack@candle.superlink.net> writes:

[#33754] Re: qualms about respond_to? idiom — David Alan Black <dblack@...> 2002/02/13

Hi --

[#33848] "Powered by Ruby" banner — Yuri Leikind <YuriLeikind@...>

Hello Ruby folks,

78 messages 2002/02/14
[#33909] Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — Leon Torres <leon@...> 2002/02/14

On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Yuri Leikind wrote:

[#33916] RE: "Powered by Ruby" banner — "Jack Dempsey" <dempsejn@...> 2002/02/15

A modest submission:

[#33929] Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — yet another bill smith <bigbill.smith@...> 2002/02/15

Kent Dahl wrote:

[#33932] OT Netscape 4.x? was Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — Chris Gehlker <gehlker@...> 2002/02/15

On 2/15/02 5:54 AM, "yet another bill smith" <bigbill.smith@verizon.net>

[#33933] RE: OT Netscape 4.x? was Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — "Jack Dempsey" <dempsejn@...> 2002/02/15

i just don't understand why it didn't show up! dhtml/javascript, ok, but a

[#33937] Re: OT Netscape 4.x? was Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — Chris Gehlker <gehlker@...> 2002/02/15

On 2/15/02 7:16 AM, "Jack Dempsey" <dempsejn@georgetown.edu> wrote:

[#33989] Re: OT OmniWeb [was: Netscape 4.x?] — Sean Russell <ser@...> 2002/02/16

Chris Gehlker wrote:

[#33991] Re: OT OmniWeb [was: Netscape 4.x?] — Rob Partington <rjp@...> 2002/02/16

In message <3c6e5e01_1@spamkiller.newsgroups.com>,

[#33993] Re: OT OmniWeb [was: Netscape 4.x?] — Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@...> 2002/02/16

* Rob Partington (rjp@browser.org) wrote:

[#33925] Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — Martin Maciaszek <mmaciaszek@...> 2002/02/15

In article <3C6CFCCA.5AD5CA67@scnsoft.com>, Yuri Leikind wrote:

[#33956] Re: "Powered by Ruby" banner — Leon Torres <leon@...> 2002/02/15

On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Martin Maciaszek wrote:

[#33851] Ruby and .NET — Patrik Sundberg <ps@...>

I have been reading a bit about .NET for the last couple of days and must say

53 messages 2002/02/14

[#34024] Compiled companion language for Ruby? — Erik Terpstra <erik@...>

Hmmm, seems that my previous post was in a different thread, I'll try

12 messages 2002/02/16

[#34036] The GUI Returns — "Horacio Lopez" <vruz@...>

Hello all,

33 messages 2002/02/17

[#34162] Epic4/Ruby — Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@...>

Rejoice, for you no longer have to put up with that evil excuse for a

34 messages 2002/02/18

[#34185] Operator overloading and multiple arguments — ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)

I'm trying to overload the '<=' operator in a class in order to use it for

10 messages 2002/02/18

[#34217] Ruby for web development — beripome@... (Billy)

Hi all,

21 messages 2002/02/19

[#34350] FAQ for comp.lang.ruby — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

RUBY NEWSGROUP FAQ -- Welcome to comp.lang.ruby! (Revised 2001-2-18)

15 messages 2002/02/20

[#34375] Setting the Ruby continued — <jostein.berntsen@...>

Hi,

24 messages 2002/02/20
[#34384] Re: Setting the Ruby continued — Paulo Schreiner <paulo@...> 2002/02/20

Also VERY important:

[#34467] recursive require — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

I'm having a really odd thing happen with two files that mutually

18 messages 2002/02/21

[#34503] special characters — Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@...>

Hi all,

13 messages 2002/02/22

[#34517] Windows Installer Ruby 166-0 available — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>

16 messages 2002/02/22

[#34597] rdoc/xml questions — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

24 messages 2002/02/23

[#34631] Object/Memory Management — "Sean O'Dell" <sean@...>

I'm new to Ruby and the community here (I've been learning Ruby for a grand

44 messages 2002/02/23

[#34682] duplicate method name — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

I just found a case in a test file where i had two tests of the same

16 messages 2002/02/24
[#34687] Re: duplicate method name — s@... (Stefan Schmiedl) 2002/02/24

Hi Ron.

[#34791] Style Question — Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...>

So I'm building this set theory library. The "only" object is supposed

13 messages 2002/02/25

[#34912] RCR?: parallel to until: as_soon_as — Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@...>

Hi,

18 messages 2002/02/26

[#34972] OT A Question on work styles — Chris Gehlker <gehlker@...>

As a Mac baby I just had to step through ruby in GDB *from the command line*

20 messages 2002/02/28

[#35015] Time Comparison — "Sean O'Dell" <sean@...>

I am using the time object to compare times between two files and I'm

21 messages 2002/02/28

Re: [Swig] RE: SWIG/Ruby woes with g++ 3.0

From: Craig Files <cfiles@...>
Date: 2002-02-15 14:44:44 UTC
List: ruby-talk #33934
Lyle, 

  I don't think that this is fixed yet.  (I attempted to email you about this
on Wednesday, and it looks like I sent it to the wrong address.  So, if you
have changed the code since then please let me know.)

  I just downloaded the latest CVS swig version.  This is what rubyhead.swg
looks like:
#ifdef RUBY_METHOD_FUNC
#  define VALUEFUNC(f) RUBY_METHOD_FUNC(f)
#  define VOIDFUNC(f) ((RUBY_DATA_FUNC) f)
#else
#  ifdef __cplusplus
#    if defined(_WIN32) && defined(_MSC_VER)
#      define VALUEFUNC(f) ((VALUE (*)())f)
#      define VOIDFUNC(f) ((void (*)(void *))f)
#    else
#      define VALUEFUNC(f) ((VALUE (*)(...))f)
#      define VOIDFUNC(f) ((void (*)(...))f)
#    endif
#  else
#   define VALUEFUNC(f) (f)
#   define VOIDFUNC(f) (f)
#  endif
#endif

I am compiling with g++ version 3.02 and version 2.96*.  The problem is that
this code works for Ruby 1.7, but not for Ruby 1.6.  What I see is that
VALUEFUNC(f) is now incorrect.

In ruby 1.6:
#define RUBY_METHOD_FUNC(func) ((VALUE (*)__((...)))func)
and in ruby 1.7
#define RUBY_METHOD_FUNC(func) ((VALUE (*)(ANYARGS))func)

The surprise is that methods like rb_define_singleton_method are hard coded
defined in ruby 1.6 as this:
void rb_define_singleton_method _((VALUE,const char*,VALUE(*)(),int));

While in ruby 1.7:
void rb_define_singleton_method _((VALUE, const char*, VALUE(*)(ANYARGS),
int));
Anyway, because of the difference in definitions in ruby 1.6, the current swig
wrapper is not working.

  Craig

On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 07:49:40AM -0600, Johnson, Lyle wrote:
> > 	I just found a problem with generated SWIG code and g++ 3.0.3 which
> > escaped me until now since I've been using 2.95.4.
> >
> > In short:
> > 1) the SWIG/Ruby wrappers define VALUEFUNC(f) as (VALUE (*)(...))f when
> > __cplusplus is defined.
> > 2) in the initialization function, VALUEFUNC(f) is passed to
> > rb_define_method as the 3rd argument
> > 3) However, in intern.h rb_define_method is declared as taking a 3rd
> > argument of type VALUE (*)(), i.e., no ellipsis
> > 4) g++ 2.95.4 didn't complain. g++ 3.0.3 does. It says that it "cannot
> > convert 'VALUE (*)(...)' to 'VALUE (*)()'" and fails.
> >
> > Any insight? Is this something that can be fixed?
> 
> This has been fixed in the CVS version of SWIG (and presumably will show up
> in the SWIG 1.3.12 release). In the CVS version of SWIG 1.3, VALUEFUNC() is
> just an alias for RUBY_METHOD_FUNC(), which is the macro that Matz uses in
> "ruby.h" to do this typecase; so SWIG-generated wrappers *should* now always
> be consistent with the Ruby header files against which you're compiling.
> _______________________________________________
> Swig maillist  -  Swig@cs.uchicago.edu
> http://mailman.cs.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/swig

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
 Craig Files                      |                     / 
   http://www.ee.pdx.edu/~cfiles/ |          __o       / 
   craig_files@agilent.com        |          \<,      / 
__________________________________| _______()/ ()____/ (970)288-0183 
    

In This Thread