[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

13 messages 2000/10/02

[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

OK, here is what I think I know.

14 messages 2000/10/11

[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

18 messages 2000/10/11
[#5427] RE: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — OZAWA -Crouton- Sakuro <crouton@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,

[#5429] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...> 2000/10/11

Thanks for the input.

[#5432] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,

[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:

80 messages 2000/10/13
[#5531] Re: Some newbye question — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2000/10/14

Hi,

[#5544] Re: Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...> 2000/10/15

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#5576] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2000/10/16

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:

[#5617] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2000/10/16

Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:

[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>

There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about

16 messages 2000/10/20
[#5712] Re: Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...> 2000/10/20

Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:

[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>

Hello fellow rubyists,

21 messages 2000/10/26

[ruby-talk:5478] Re: 2 ideas from Haskell

From: schneik@...
Date: 2000-10-12 21:37:18 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5478


Hi,

Hal Fulton wrote:

#   Mark Slagell <ms@iastate.edu> wrote:
# > Do either of these interest anyone:
# >
# > 1. a "literate mode" that assumes all lines in a script are comments
# > unless the first column is a special character (Haskell uses '>').
#
# Hmmm... not on my Top Ten list of features. I think =begin/=end are
# basically enough...

Well, if some sort of good justification is forthcoming, then for
semi-consistency in literate mode, how about =# starting in the first
column?

# > 2. the ability to specify a step value in ranges, e.g., (0,2..18) for
# > even numbers in the range.
#
# There should be some way to loop in increments (preferably not
# manually with while or until). On the other hand, I think this
# should NOT be done by changing the concept of a range.

Or at least it shouldn't look like an existing range with a number and
comma prefixed to it. The 2..18 looks like a range to me. I like the idea,
but not the proposed syntax. Something like (0..18, 2) would be much
cleaner visually (at least for me), and you could think of the 2nd
position as a parameter that normally defaults to 1.

Conrad Schneiker
(This note is unofficial and subject to improvement without notice.)



In This Thread

Prev Next