From: Thomas Adam <thomas_adam16@...>
Date: 2003-09-11T17:12:06+09:00
Subject: Re: using a filter inside Ruby

 --- Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> wrote: 

> >>> This points up my major frustration with Ruby-- I had to completely
> >>> guess as to how Open3 worked, or *even that it existed at all*.
> >>> There are no docs I can find for it, and this makes developing with
> >>> Ruby more of a pain than it needs to be.  If I were doing this in
> >>> perl, I'd just have to 'perldoc -q pipe', and instantly I have docs
> >>> on
> >>> IPC::Open2 and a reference to IPC::Open3 if I need that.
> >>
> >> Yes, you're right, the documentation should be better. Of course, if
> >> you look at open3.rb, you'll see this:
> >>
> >> # Usage:
> >> #	require "open3"
> >> #
> >> #	in, out, err = Open3.popen3('nroff -man')
> >> #  or
> >> #	include Open3
> >> #	in, out, err = popen3('nroff -man')
> >>
> >> HOWEVER, this doesn't even work because 'in' is a keyword in Ruby!
> >> That, IMHO, should be fixed. (Both this specific case and
> >> documentation for libraries in general. However, I obviously don't
> >> care *that* much, otherwise I'd be writing documentation right now.)
> >>
> >> Jason Creighton
> 
> Damn %#$^#$ web email client!  %^#@$%@#$
> 
> Sorry for the redundant post.  What I was going to say is:
> 
> Here's how you can ensure this is fixed:
>  * subscribe to ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
>  * create a patch to fix that documentation issue (diff -u format, I
> think)

Nitpick: unified diffs here, although shorter, can often less, umm,
informative and unless specifically asked for, I would suggest sending in
both a non-unified and a unified diff.

Also, it is not a patch file, until it has been applied :)

>  * send it to ruby-core, as a "PATCH: ..." subject
> 
> It seems heavyweight, but it makes it easier for the maintainer to go
> "yep, that looks good, I'll commit that".  And besides, once you've
> subscribed, it's easier to contribute more patches!

Given Jason's busy workload (I would imagine) I doubt he will be able to
contribute that many (if any) patches.

> Of course, for some files, it may be better to send patches directly to
> the author, but if the file is in the Ruby distro, ruby-core is a good
> catch-all.

Since you are such an advocate in creating patches and the like, perhaps
you would send one in? :)

-- Thomas Adam

=====
Thomas Adam

"The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- www.linuxgazette.com

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk