[#6363] Re: rescue clause affecting IO loop behavior — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == David Alan Black <dblack@candle.superlink.net> writes:

17 messages 2000/11/14
[#6367] Re: rescue clause affecting IO loop behavior — David Alan Black <dblack@...> 2000/11/14

Hello again --

[#6582] best way to interleaf arrays? — David Alan Black <dblack@...>

Hello --

15 messages 2000/11/26

[#6646] RE: Array Intersect (&) question — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>

Ross asked something about widely known and largely ignored language (on

23 messages 2000/11/29
[#6652] RE: Array Intersect (&) question — rpmohn@... (Ross Mohn) 2000/11/29

aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com (Aleksi Niemel) wrote in

[#6723] Re: Array Intersect (&) question — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...> 2000/12/01

> >Use a hash. Here's code to do both and more. It assumes that

[#6656] printing/accessing arrays and hashes — raja@... (Raja S.)

I'm coming to Ruby with a Python & Common Lisp background.

24 messages 2000/11/30

[ruby-talk:6206] Re: marshal.dump again

From: ts <decoux@...>
Date: 2000-11-09 13:18:56 UTC
List: ruby-talk #6206
>>>>> "H" == Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:

H> The second parameter is supposed to be optional.  How does ruby determine
H> that the second parameter has been missed out, but not the third (limit)?

 If you have only 2 parameters and the second is a FIXNUM then it's the
limit. 

H> If the limit is negative, the depth is not checked.  Presumably the 
H> limit is not ignored -- the only difference is the generation of an error
H> message.  Is that right?  I mean, a negative limit doesn't mean  "keep
H> going down till you have the whole object", for example?

 ruby decrement the limit parameter and only check if this value is null to
 stop the dump.

 With a negative limit (the default) it dump the whole object.


Guy Decoux

p.s.: it's best to read the source for this sort of information.

In This Thread

Prev Next