[#3741] Re: Why it's quiet -- standard distribution issues — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
I think it's the feature of the mailing list archive to create a threads of
[#3756] RE: XMP on comments — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> require "xmp"
[#3766] modulo and remainder — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3776] Kernel.rand — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
How about defining:
[#3781] Widening out discussions — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3795] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> As matz said in [ruby-talk:3785] and Dave said in [ruby-talk:1229],
Hi, Aleksi,
[#3823] Re: Array.pick — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> > Just a general comment--a brief statement of purpose and using
[#3827] JRuby? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Is there or will there be Ruby equivalent of JPython?
[#3882] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> |look too strange, confusing, or cryptic. Maybe just @, $, %, &.
Hi,
[#3918] A question about variable names... — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#3935] If your company uses Pallets, Skids, Boxes, Lumber, etc. — pallets2@...
[#3956] Tk PhotoImage options — andy@... (Andrew Hunt)
Hi all,
[#3971] Thread and File do not work together — "Michael Neumann" <neumann@...>
following example do not work correctly with my ruby
[#3986] Re: Principle of least effort -- another Ruby virtue. — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>
> Principle of Least Effort.
Hi,
[#4005] Re: Pluggable functions and blocks — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Aleksi makes a question:
[#4008] Ruby installation instructions for Windows — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
I had to write these instructions for my friends. I thought it might be nice
[#4043] What are you using Ruby for? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
On 15 Jul 2000 22:08:50 -0500,
Hi,
[#4057] Re: What are you using Ruby for? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Johann:
[#4082] Re: What are you using Ruby for? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
[#4091] 'each' and 'in' — hal9000@...
I just recently realized why the default
[#4107] Re: 'each' and 'in' -- special char problem? — schneik@...
[#4114] Method signature - a question for the group — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#4139] Facilitating Ruby self-propagation with the rig-it autopolymorph application. — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>
Hi,
[#4158] Getting Tk to work on Windows — "Michael Neumann" <neumann@...>
Hi....
[#4178] Partly converted English Ruby/Tk widget demo working. — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>
Hi,
[#4234] @ variables not updated within method? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
On 27 Jul 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#4267] Ruby.next, Perl6, Python 3000, Tcl++, etc. -- Any opportunities for common implementation code? — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Hi,
"Conrad Schneiker" wrote:
[ruby-talk:03795] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil
> As matz said in [ruby-talk:3785] and Dave said in [ruby-talk:1229], > I often want to check if modification is done. These and your example was exactly what I was looking for! Thank you. Now I've come up with another proposition. We could change the behaviour in next versions. (And of course provide a simple, yet most cases fixing upgrade script.) We could define obj.method! to *always* return the possibly altered object. And, now the new trick, add Array.uniq!? which would work like current Array.uniq!. The actual semantic hint the developer should get when he sees obj.method!? is 'this method modifies the object and returns something (possibly boolean) describing if any action was taken'. In Array.uniq!? case we could return nil when the array was unchanged and the modified array if it changed. (Or we could return array consisting of removed items (items which had a duplicate), which is subject for another debate. Which I could kill now by saying if one needs the array of items which had duplicate on the original array he could say: array.dup - array.uniq! I might be carrying method?:=$-冠 -notation too far here, but as you see we have still plenty of ugly characters left for use :). Besides, this didn't use any more ugly characters, it just combined old ones. - Aleksi