[#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:5790] Re: Shells and Ruby

From: Matthew PATTISON <mfp@...>
Date: 2000-10-23 14:36:32 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5790
Hi,

I was wondering, maybe this has been discussed before and dismissed, how
hard would it be to write a Unix/Linux shell whose language was Ruby, or a
slight variant. Basically if performance wasn't an issue this could sit on top 
of another shell (eg. bash/sh), and wrap commands, and any variance needed in 
the syntax could be achieved via a preprocessor. I think some people
are/were doing this with Perl, although I don't know how serious an attempt
it is/was. I just think it would be very cool to have so much power in my
command line.  Please tell me if I'm being crazy.

Matt Pattison
     
* Hal E. Fulton (hal9000@hypermetrics.com) [001024 01:05]:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dat Nguyen <thucdat@hotmail.com>
> To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk@netlab.co.jp>
> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 6:27 AM
> Subject: [ruby-talk:5787] Shells and Ruby
> 
> 
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Is there anything that shells (Korn, C, Bash, Bourne, etc.), awk, sed,
> etc.
> > can do but Ruby can't?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dat
> 
> Well, as far as I know, Ruby can do everything that ksh
> can, but perhaps not always as conveniently.
> 
> I investigated using method_missing to treat OS commands
> as (missing) methods and then pass them with their args
> to the OS. But Ruby methods have commas separating
> their parameters. So it's not as simple as that.
> 
> In short, it's easier to run an external program from ksh
> than from Ruby. That's my only thought so far.
> 
> Hal
> 
> 
> 

In This Thread