[#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:5772] Re: Windows InstalShield question

From: "Conrad Schneiker/Austin/Contr/IBM" <schneik@...>
Date: 2000-10-23 07:33:23 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5772
Clemens Hintze  mailto: c.hintze@gmx.net
 
# In article <m2n1fy8h3q.fsf@zip.local.thomases.com>, Dave Thomas wrote:
# >
# >Folks:
# 
# (...)
# 
# >My question is: would you also expect it to add the Ruby bin directory 
# >to your PATH? Which would be the least surprising: updating PATH or
# >not?

Pardon the pun, but I would be most unpleasantly surprised if you did 
either one by default. :-) 

# Some of the programs I have installed on Windows, let me the choice 
whether 
# they should update the path for me or not.
# 
# They also let me the choice if I want to restart the computer after
# installation or later on my own desire.

I think this (i.e. asking) is the most responsibly user-friendly way to do 
things. 

Having stuff on your PATH is very convenient, but for some reason it is a 
surprisingly limited resource on Win/NT (a mere 300+ chars, IIRC), and (at 
least a year or two ago), installing a Java SDK or a Java IDE would gobble 
up something like 2/3s of it, effectively filling it up and making it 
unusable for subsequent installs. (Does anyone know if Win2K fixes this?) 
So under some common conditions, updating PATH would be very desirable, 
and under other common conditions, it would be undesirable if you needed 
to conserve a very limited amount of space.

Likewise, consider a prospective Ruby user asking sysadmins to install 
this under various system configurations.  If some fraction of sysadmins 
don't have to manually undo an unwanted default, it will reduce the 
average friction with which Ruby spreads around.

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

In This Thread

Prev Next