[#4766] Wiki — "Glen Stampoultzis" <trinexus@...>

21 messages 2000/09/04
[#4768] RE: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nahi@...> 2000/09/04

Hi, Glen,

[#4783] Re: Wiki — Masatoshi SEKI <m_seki@...> 2000/09/04

[#4785] Re: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...> 2000/09/05

Howdy,

[#4883] Re-binding a block — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

16 messages 2000/09/12

[#4930] Perl 6 rumblings -- RFC 225 (v1) Data: Superpositions — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>

Hi,

11 messages 2000/09/15

[#4936] Ruby Book Eng. translation editor's questions — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

20 messages 2000/09/16

[#5045] Proposal: Add constants to Math — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

15 messages 2000/09/21

[#5077] Crazy idea? infix method calls — hal9000@...

This is a generalization of the "in" operator idea which I

17 messages 2000/09/22

[#5157] Compile Problem with 1.6.1 — Scott Billings <aerogems@...>

When I try to compile Ruby 1.6.1, I get the following error:

15 messages 2000/09/27

[ruby-talk:5126] Re: Types and ===

From: Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...>
Date: 2000-09-26 03:50:17 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5126
From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@hypermetrics.com>
Subject: [ruby-talk:5122] Re: Types and ===
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:47:49 +0900

> But to ask the question, "Which of these strings matches this pattern?" I
> cannot
> do this:
> 
> case /pattern/
>   when str1
>       stmt1
>   when str2
>       stmt2
>   ...
> end

you *can* do this, sort of, using case. but, IMHO, i don't know i'd
use it.

IMHO, a problem usually solved by using case statement itself is not
commutative?

usually, we want string to match one regex and do the statement
assosiated to, but don't we want to know all of the string that mutchs
given regex?

in that case, case is not well suited. use if.
--
        yashi

class String
  alias_method '_===', '==='

  def ===(other)
    case other
    when Regexp
      other === self
    else
      _===(other)
    end
  end
end

case /[ab]o/
when 'abc'
  p 1
when 'abo'
  p 2
when 'ao'
  p 3
end

In This Thread