[#3101] Compile_err — "Fergus Hayman" <shayman@...>
[#3109] Is divmod dangerous? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3110] my wish list for Ruby — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
[#3119] Re: Min and max? — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "M" == Mathieu Bouchard <matju@CAM.ORG> writes:
[#3149] Retrieving the hostname and port in net/http — Roland Jesse <jesse@...>
Hi,
[#3154] 3-d arrays? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Is there an idiom for 3-dimensional arrays in Ruby? I see that
[#3167] ruby.h needed to compile Interbase module — Jilani Khaldi <jilanik@...>
Hi all,
[#3189] BUG or something? — "Park Hee Sob" <phasis@...>
Hi,
[#3221] Re: Ruby & Interbase -- Please answer if you know! — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "J" == Jilani Khaldi <jilanik@tin.it> writes:
[#3222] Ruby coding standard? — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Robert Feldt wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard <matju@cam.org> wrote:
[#3277] Re: BUG or something? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> |I am new to Ruby and this brings up a question I have had
Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com> writes:
On 12 Jun 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
ts <decoux@moulon.inra.fr> writes:
[#3296] RE: about documentation — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> I want to contribute to the ruby project in my spare time.
Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com> writes:
Hi,
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Toshiro Kuwabara wrote:
Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
[#3331] Selling Rubies by the Carat — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3338] PID of child processes — Andrew Hunt <Andy@...>
[#3363] chomp! — "David Douthitt" <DDouthitt@...>
I was looking at the documentation for chomp and chomp! - and the results of chomp startled me to say the least.
[#3407] Waffling between Python and Ruby — "Warren Postma" <embed@...>
I was looking at the Ruby editor/IDE for windows and was disappointed with
[#3410] Exercice: Translate into Ruby :-) — Jilani Khaldi <jilanik@...>
Hi All,
Jilani Khaldi <jilanik@tin.it> writes:
Hi,
"NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nahi@keynauts.com> writes:
Hi, Dave,
Hello,
[#3453] Re: Static Typing( Was: Waffling between Python and Ruby) — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>
[#3515] Options database (was: Define & Include?) — claird@... (Cameron Laird)
In article <8ikot4$ki$0@216.39.170.247>, Dave LeBlanc <whisper@oz.net> wrote:
[#3516] Deep copy? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Given that I cannot overload =, how should I go about ensuring a deep
In message "[ruby-talk:03516] Deep copy?"
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000, GOTO Kentaro wrote:
Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
[#3532] Extension in C++? — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
[#3541] function objects? — Johann Hibschman <johann@...>
Hi folks,
[#3544] A small quiz — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3588] Interface polymorphism — hal9000@...
Another question, guys.
[#3607] Is there a statistician in the house? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3662] Ruby 1.4.5 install from Mandrake cooker rpms ?problem? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...>
This is the first time that I've installed ruby, so
[#3685] no traffic — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Hi,
[#3694] Why it's quiet — hal9000@...
We are all busy learning the new language
Hi,
Hi,
Hi, matz,
Hi,
Hi,
[#3699] Multithreaded/Embedded Ruby? — "Warren Postma" <embed@...>
Is there any information on Thread safety in ruby. Suppose I embed Ruby in a
Hi,
[ruby-talk:03590] Re: Static Typing( Was: Waffling between Python and Ruby)
olczyk@interaccess.com (Thaddeus L. Olczyk) writes: > On 21 Jun 2000 12:10:18 -0500, Dave Thomas <Dave@Thomases.com> wrote: > > >> Maybe I was misunderstanding the original poster, but he seemed to be > >> advocating DbC without any notion of types other than "object that responds > >> to message X". To state the obvious, if the language has a notion of > >> interface, protocol, or type, it's merely necessary to check that the object > >> conforms to that type, at compile-time or run-time, since the contract is > >> available in the interface/protocol/type definition. > > > >Not always (there are issues with polymorphism) but in general. > There are no issues with polymorphism. This is what polymorphism > is all about. Yes there are programmers that can create issues ( eg by > violating Liskov ), but there are no *good* programmers. OK - I understand. There's no need for any system of contract checking to be rigorous, because we can rely on *good* programmers to follow the rules such as LSP. Wonder why we need contracts at all ;-) DbC is a good discipline, but it does not *ensure* correctness. Anyone who codes as if it does is risking ignoring real problems. Regards Dave