[#407] New feature for Ruby? — Clemens.Hintze@...

Hi all,

27 messages 1999/07/01
[#413] Re: New feature for Ruby? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 1999/07/01

Hi Clemens,

[#416] Re: New feature for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...> 1999/07/01

On Thu, 01 Jul 1999, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#418] Re: New feature for Ruby? — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/01

Hi

[#426] Re: New feature for Ruby? — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/02

Hi,

[#440] Now another totally different ;-) — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>

Hi,

21 messages 1999/07/09
[#441] Re: Now another totally different ;-) — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 1999/07/09

Hi,

[#442] Re: Now another totally different ;-) — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...> 1999/07/09

On Fri, 09 Jul 1999, you wrote:

[#443] — Michael Hohn <hohn@...>

Hello,

26 messages 1999/07/09
[#444] interactive ruby, debugger — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/09

Hi Michael,

[ruby-talk:00465] Re: Now another totally different ;-)

From: Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>
Date: 1999-07-12 06:37:36 UTC
List: ruby-talk #465
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, you wrote:
>Hi, 

Hi,

>
>In message "[ruby-talk:00456] Re: Now another totally different ;-)"
>    on 99/07/11, Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@gmx.net> writes:

[...]

>
>I'm very sorry. I understand your request now (as far as I believe). 

Ahem?!? You are sorry for understanding my request now?? ;-))))

[...]

>I love your generous such as being interested even in my tricky
>example :-)

Your tricks teach me much of Ruby. :-)

>
>>1. Your class is tricky coded. It seems to be a open-end enumeration.
>>   So you cannot simply include Enumerable, as that module awaits
>>   self-determinish enumerations. Here no method of Enumerable would
>>   work well, you have to break that enumeration manually by break.
>>   These are not the conditions Enumerable would like to use the
>>   `each' method.
>
>But IO<Enumerable has the same characteristics. IO is essentially a 
>nondeterministic class. 

I hope not so ;-) I hope, that the IO stream would end some time
with a EOF. So that would make it a deterministic one, wouldn't it?

[exellent examples of code deleted...]

>
>Well, This solution may be not ellegant. 
>

I fear, that I must agree. It is tricky, but I think a little
overblasted for my simple and humble desire ;-)

>-- gotoken

\cle

In This Thread