[#393742] Getting the class of an object. — Ralph Shnelvar <ralphs@...32.com>

Consider;

14 messages 2012/03/06

[#393815] arcadia IDE requires tcl/tk and ruby-tk — Thufir Hawat <hawat.thufir@...>

which or where tcl and tk does arcadia require? Is this a gem which I

13 messages 2012/03/13

[#393952] What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...>

Hi!

18 messages 2012/03/21
[#393953] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

Active Support has recently added qualified_const_* methods to Module

[#393954] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

Ah, that won't work in 1.8.

[#393959] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 16:43, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393960] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#393961] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 20:48, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393962] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/21

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#393967] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Nikolai Weibull <now@...> 2012/03/22

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 22:11, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:

[#393969] Re: What’s the best way to check if a feature/class has been loaded? — Xavier Noria <fxn@...> 2012/03/22

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se> wrote:

[#394154] uninitialized constant SOCKSSocket — Resident Moron <lists@...>

I am running ruby 1.9.3 on a linux box. I would like to use

10 messages 2012/03/29

[#394160] Why z = Complex(1,2) rather than z = Complex.new(1,2)? — Ori Ben-Dor <lists@...>

What's this syntax, z = Complex(1,2), as opposed to z =

14 messages 2012/03/29

[#394175] shoes no such file to load -- rubygems — Mr theperson <lists@...>

I have installed shoes to develop GUI applications but when I try and

13 messages 2012/03/29

[#394201] Can't open url with a subdomain with an underscore — Jeroen van Ingen <lists@...>

I try to open the following URL: http://auto_diversen.marktplaza.nl/

10 messages 2012/03/30

[#394222] Ruby openssl ECC help plz — no name <lists@...>

I am confused on how to properly export public ECC key. I can see it

13 messages 2012/03/31

Re: http://ruby-doc.org/docs/keywords/1.9/ : (Object)

From: "Carina C. Zona" <cczona@...>
Date: 2012-03-07 02:47:45 UTC
List: ruby-talk #393765
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Kendall Gifford <zettabyte@gmail.com> wrote=
:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Carina C. Zona <cczona@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Object is their class, and the root object in Ruby. =A0(Well,
>> technically BasicObject is now the root object. =A0But that's if you
>> want to bypass the rest of the object heirarchy.) =A0As shown in the
>> core docs, similar notation is standard for all methods.
>>
>
> Hmm, I was under the impression that keywords were distinct from
> methods. After all, I can't explicitly specify a receiver when using a
> keyword:
>
> $ irb
> 1.9.2-p290 :001 > self.begin
> NoMethodError: undefined method `begin' for main:Object
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0from (irb):1
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0from /Users/kendall/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.2-p290/bin/irb:16=
:in `<main>'
> 1.9.2-p290 :002 > self.def hi
> NameError: undefined local variable or method `hi' for main:Object
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0from (irb):2
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0from /Users/kendall/.rvm/rubies/ruby-1.9.2-p290/bin/irb:16=
:in `<main>'
>
> As such, I'm also confused why a *keyword* is somehow affiliated with
> a class. I'd guess/assume it's just how the RDoc engine works and was
> used to document keywords (???) as opposed to it actually indicating
> that keywords are somehow implemented as methods on Object. I'd love
> to know, semantically speaking as well as technically, what the case
> is here.
>
> --
> Kendall Gifford
> zettabyte@gmail.com


More info here.  http://stackoverflow.com/a/9446185/893498  Short
version: keywords are an exception to "everything is an object in
Ruby".  Interesting.

In This Thread

Prev Next