[#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:03811] Re: Ubiquitous Ruby
Hi, This may make more sense if you start reading from somewhere about 2/3rds the way to the end. "Dave Thomas" wrote: > "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@jump.net> writes: > > > I am all for trying to do all sorts of neat new things in Ruby. But > > I think we should be very wary of letting highly hypothetical tail > > wag a very real dog. > > Agreed. Now demonstrate why your dog is any more real than my tail.[1] Because one is solidly based on fairly _widespread_, fairly _common_, and _present_ needs, practices, experiences, and conditions that have and will endure for some time, for the various sorts of reasons previously described (and repeatedly deleted from replies). The other is off in the future (and notably, you didn't answer my question concerning the crucial threshold of smallness) > I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's just that your arguments > comes from just as much of a guess as mine. Not so. They are based on experience, and on previously mentioned (and once again deleted) factors. You assume users want > everything. Again, not so. I think you've either lost track of or have misread what I've previously said about this. > I don't see anything wrong with pursuing both. Well, I'm happy you finally agree. :-) > As I suggested > previously, you or someone else could construct and maintain the > comprehensive distribution, while others could work on alternative > technologies. Gee, didn't I previously suggest that previously? I have strong premonitions of recursive deja vu that just won't stop ! :-) But this wan't the original issue on this branch of this thread. We were discussing limitations to the size of the Ruby core, not distribution. > Footnotes: > [1] This is a rhetorical question! I don't really want to prolong an But of course you really must be expecting a reply (:-) when such a rhetorical question radically mischaracterizes what I have previously written. I always "like" those "I'll stop here if you will let me have the final word" replies. :-) Conrad