[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>
From: Jon Babcock <jon@kanji.com>
Thanks.
From: Jon Babcock <jon@kanji.com>
Ah, thanks, I think I get it, a slightly different nuance then.
From: Jon Babcock <jon@kanji.com>
'Because all of Ruby has been...' -> 'Because Ruby has been...'?
[#5221] better way to say 'recursive join' — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...>
in [ruby-dev:6289], Shugo Maeda suggested better name for recursive
[#5240] Ruby for Win32/DOS — Dennis Newbold <dennisn@...>
Not all of us are blessed with the opportunity to be able to develop on
[#5254] problem: undefined method `size' for File — "葡ic Santonacci" <Eric.Santonacci@...>
Hi all,
HI,
[#5264] Re: problem: undefined method `size' for Fil e — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
matz critizes good solution argumenting with features lacking from some
[#5268] Proper ConditionVariable usage? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Abstract
On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 07:05:22 +0900, Aleksi Niemelwrote:
In message <20001004110040.A26666@xs4all.nl>
Hi,
[#5276] Re: Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — schneik@...
[#5310] Errata for Ruby Book? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>
[#5318] Redefining super method as singleton? — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
[#5329] Ruby vs PHP ? — "Valerio Bamberga" <bamberga@...>
Hi!
[#5331] Unit testing network code? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Can someone give me pointers on how to Unit Test code that is run on
> I think maybe one would test each end on its own first, faking the
[#5335] string streams in Ruby? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
Is there any way, without going through "modifying the internals",
[#5346] Is Ruby "enough better"? — Gabriel Lima <Gabriel.Lima@...>
Hi.
[#5364] Allowing *ary's in the middle of a camma separated list — "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@...>
Hi,
Hi,
At Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:17:24 +0900,
[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
OK, here is what I think I know.
At Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:37:25 +0900,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
Hi,
[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>
At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,
Thanks for the input.
At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,
At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:25:03 +0900,
oops, I didn't read this one before I went out for food..
At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:59:19 +0900,
[#5437] Editor recommandations? — "Chris Morris" <chrismo@...>
Any recommendations on editors for Ruby script on Windows?
[#5471] 2 ideas from Haskell — Mark Slagell <ms@...>
Do either of these interest anyone:
[#5479] Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...>
I am reading the documentation I found about ruby but several points
[#5480] InstallShield version for Ruby soon... — andy@... (Andrew Hunt)
Okay folks,
[#5489] Regexp#matches — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Would someone object aliasing matches for match in Regexp?
[#5505] Sorry, What is Ruby Book — Mansuriatus Shahrir Amir <chioque@...>
Sorry if this information is somewhere obvious. I just stumbled upon
[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:
Hi,
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:
Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:
Hi,
> Proposal a and b have incompatibility. I'm not sure it's worth it.
>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@zetabits.com> writes:
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, ts wrote:
>>>>> "Y" == Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@zetabits.com> writes:
[#5558] GC: malloc_memories — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
Hi,
> |precipitate a new GC cycle if lots of resizing is done. My biggest
[#5570] Notes about GC — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
[#5600] passing single or multiple strings. — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
With multple assignments I can get nested arrays "shelled" (like peas)
In message "[ruby-talk:5600] passing single or multiple strings."
[#5603] debug command list in English — "Morris, Chris" <ChrisM@...>
I found this page which lists the interactive debugger commands ... anyone
[#5619] lint? — "Swit" <swit@...>
Is there something like lint for Ruby? I'd like to find NameErrors before
[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>
There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about
Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Charles Hixson wrote:
[#5715] Help: sockets broken — jason petrone <jp@...>
I just compiled ruby 1.6.1 on an openbsd 2.6 machine(x86).
[#5716] Re: Array#insert — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> From: jweirich@one.net [mailto:jweirich@one.net]
[#5727] String#slice surprise — "Guy N. Hurst" <gnhurst@...>
Hi,
Dave Thomas wrote:
[#5787] Shells and Ruby — "Dat Nguyen" <thucdat@...>
Hello all,
[#5850] Re: Array#insert rehashed — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Dave asks for:
[#5862] succ but no pred? (& the MURKY award) — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
First of all, a serious question:
[#5873] Integer(String) weirdness for a ruby newbie — Stoned Elipot <Stoned.Elipot@...>
Hi,
[#5881] Q:what about "Programming Ruby"? — Gabriel Lima <Gabriel.Lima@...>
Hi to you all.
[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>
Hello fellow rubyists,
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, hipster wrote:
[#5947] Hash.new {block} / Hash#default_proc{,_set} — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...>
I've done very little testing, but I think I've successfully implemented the
[ruby-talk:5355] Re: Object method scope
"Morris, Chris" <ChrisM@SNELLINGCORP.COM> writes:
> My question then is this: why are methods that belong to Object
> private when prefixed with Self? I don't get this.
Hi Chris:
I'm coming into this thread late, so I'm probably missing the point,
but it's kind of the other way around.
A public or protected method can be called by sending a message to a
receiver:
fred.doSomething
The pseudo variable 'self' represents the current object, and so it a
valid receiver. If you don't specify a receiver when invoking a
method, Ruby sends the message to self.
class Dave
def method1
puts "m1"
end
def method2
method1() # these two are
self.method1() # the same
end
end
Dave.new.method2
Private methods may not be called with an explicit receiver: they are
always called with 'self'. This enforces privacy: they have to be
called within the context of the current object.
At the top level, methods are added to Object. However, they are added
as private methods. This means that they may not be called with a
receiver: they always have a receiver of 'self'. Partly this is a
practical thing: these methods are probably intended to be called as
functions, and so adding a receiver would be silly. Putting them in
Object also makes them global, so they're available
everywhere. Finally, stopping them from being called with a receiver
stops you doing strange things by mistake. For example, if we override
Ruby and make a top level method public, we can do some weird things:
def wombat
puts "Marsupials rule!"
end
public :wombat
wombat # normal call
self.wombat # logically same as above
25.wombat # call wombat with an arbitrary receiver
def sneaky
puts @private
end
public :sneaky
class Dave
def initialize
@private = 123
end
end
d = Dave.new
d.sneaky # -> 123
So, having these methods private basically makes their use more
intuitive. However, Ruby being Ruby, you can always override the
default. Enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot ;-)
See you Wednesday?
Dave