[#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:04024] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:04004] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil"
on 00/07/14, Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com> writes:
|Still I don't know if the fact that method! can return nil was just
|introduced when needed (as someone pulled in some code to show it in this
|thread), and the current functionality remains because there's loads of code
|relying on it, or whether it was thought, and decided, to be inconsistent
|with the principle I just phrased. (Perhaps because Ruby is following here
|some other clean and simple priciple.)
Actually, it is mainly a historical reason.
In old days, non bang methods returns copy if modified, and original
if not modified. So you could distinguish whether modify is done by
comparing the return value with the original object. But bang method
could not provide the way to know if modified or not. That was why I
made bang methods to return nil if not modified the object.
But later, non bang behavior was changed to return copy always, to
avoid copy/original confusion. But I still expected the need to check
modification, so changing bang behavior was abandoned.
matz.