[#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:5969] FW: [ruby-dev:11339] Re: Ruby I18N

From: Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Date: 2000-10-31 13:02:48 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5969
Here's Matz reply to my inquiry what people are talking about in the
ruby-dev, in case there's some people who are interested in to participate.

	- Aleksi

-----Original Message-----
From: matz@zetabits.com [mailto:matz@zetabits.com]
Sent: den 30 oktober 2000 16:23
To: ruby-dev@netlab.co.jp
Subject: [ruby-dev:11339] Re: Ruby I18N


Hi,

In message "[ruby-dev:11338] Re: Ruby I18N"
    on 00/10/30, Aleksi Niemela <aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com> writes:

|Any chances to get a small English summary of this thread posted to
|ruby-talk.

Unlike Perl and Python, we don't choose UTF-8 as internal encoding.
Reasons:

  * we already have zillions of multibyte text data; performance
    penalty of code conversion is not tolerable.

  * round trip problem; the string code conversion to Unicode then
    converted back to the original encoding sometimes does not result
    in the same string.

Instead, we treat various encodings as they are in 1.7 (and eventually
1.8 or 2.0).

							matz.


In This Thread

Prev Next