[#4341] DRY and embedded docs. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
If I have a here document in some ruby program:
[#4347] Re: DATA and rewind. — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "H" == Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
[#4350] Re: Thirty-seven Reasons [Hal Fulton] Love[s] Ruby — "David Douthitt" <DDouthitt@...>
[#4396] Re: New Require (was: RAA development ideas (was: RE: Looking for inp ut on a 'links' page)) — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
On 9 Aug 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#4411] Re: RAA development ideas (was: RE: Lookin g for inp ut on a 'links' page) — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Me:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, [iso-8859-1] Aleksi Niemelwrote:
[#4465] More RubyUnit questions. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
I am beginning to get a feel for this, but I still have a few more
[#4478] Re: RubyUnit. Warnings to be expected? — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "H" == Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
[#4481] Invoking an extension after compilation — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Hi,
[#4501] What's the biggest Ruby development? — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
[#4502] methods w/ ! giving nil — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
I have got used to the idea that methods that end in '!' return nil if
[#4503] RubyUnit and encapsulation. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
My_class's instance variables are not all "attr :<name>" type variables,
[#4537] Process.wait bug + fix — Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@...>
If your system uses the rb_waitpid() codepath of rb_f_wait(),
[#4567] Re: What's the biggest Ruby development? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Dave said:
Robert Feldt <feldt@ce.chalmers.se> writes:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
Robert Feldt <feldt@ce.chalmers.se> writes:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
Robert Feldt <feldt@ce.chalmers.se> writes:
[#4591] Can't get Tcl/Tk working — Stephen White <steve@...>
I can't get any of the samples in the ext/tk/sample directory working. All
I'm sure looking forwards to buying the book. :)
Stephen White <steve@deaf.org> writes:
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Dave Thomas wrote:
Stephen White <steve@deaf.org> writes:
[#4608] Class methods — Mark Slagell <ms@...>
Reading the thread about regexp matches made me wonder about this:
[#4611] mod_ruby 0.1.19 — shreeve@...2s.org (Steve Shreeve)
Shugo (and others),
[#4633] Printing tables — DaVinci <bombadil@...>
Hi.
[#4647] Function argument lists in parentheses? — Toby Hutton <thutton@...>
Hello,
[#4652] Andy and Dave's European Tour 2000 — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
Hi,
[#4672] calling super from c — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
[#4699] Double parenthesis — Klaus Spreckelsen <ks@...1.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Why is the first line ok, but the second line is not?
[ruby-talk:04508] Re: methods w/ ! giving nil
Hi,
In message "[ruby-talk:04502] methods w/ ! giving nil"
on 00/08/18, Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
|
|I have got used to the idea that methods that end in '!' return nil if
|nothing changes. But not all of them do. Why does array.sort! not behave
|like that? Why should it be different from the array.uniq! method in this
|respect?
Mostly because underlying qsort(3) does not provide the way to know if
modification is happened. I will gladly accept any idea to implement
consistent ! behavior without performance penalty.
matz.