[#1338] 1.8.0: possible socket problem with mswin32 builds — Jos Backus <jos@...>
Fyi: I tried the following command with two Ruby distributions on Windows 2003
5 messages
2003/08/05
[#1342] SEGV in GC under Linux — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
A while back I was getting double free()s reported on my MAC box when
5 messages
2003/08/05
[#1364] Broken REXML in Ruby 1.8 — Alexander Bokovoy <a.bokovoy@...>
Greetings!
1 message
2003/08/06
[#1378] differences between Module and Class ? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
25 messages
2003/08/11
[#1387] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2003/08/12
Hi,
[#1442] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2003/08/21
[#1452] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2003/08/22
Hi,
[#1469] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2003/08/23
[#1470] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2003/08/24
Hi,
[#1472] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2003/08/24
[#1444] Re: differences between Module and Class ?
— ts <decoux@...>
2003/08/21
>>>>> "M" == Mathieu Bouchard <matju@sympatico.ca> writes:
[#1381] proc/block with return — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
9 messages
2003/08/11
[#1394] Std lib and updating PickAxe (was Re: proc/block with return) — "Gavin Sinclair" <gsinclair@...>
> [Dave wrote:]
5 messages
2003/08/13
[#1400] subclassing Structs — Eugene Scripnik <Eugene.Scripnik@...>
I'm trying to create class which behaves as struct (almost) and has some
5 messages
2003/08/13
[#1406] _id2ref bug? — Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
While debugging some caching code, I've come across a segfault related
22 messages
2003/08/14
[#1407] Re: _id2ref bug?
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2003/08/14
Hi,
[#1413] Re: _id2ref bug? (REPRODUCED, short)
— Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
2003/08/14
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 01:57:18 +0900
[#1415] Re: _id2ref bug? (REPRODUCED, short)
— matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
2003/08/15
Hi,
[#1416] Re: _id2ref bug? (another break)
— Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
2003/08/15
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 09:21:39 +0900
[#1417] Re: _id2ref bug? (another break)
— nobu.nokada@...
2003/08/15
Hi,
[#1418] Re: _id2ref bug? (another break)
— Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
2003/08/15
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 12:35:32 +0900
[#1424] Re: _id2ref bug? (another break)
— ts <decoux@...>
2003/08/15
>>>>> "n" == nobu nokada <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:
[#1447] ruby-mode.el — Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
Attached is a patch for ruby-mode.el that adds font hilighting for
7 messages
2003/08/21
[#1450] Re: [PATCH] ruby-mode.el
— Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...>
2003/08/21
Crud, my mail has been slow, and I just got this back, but I realize I
[#1454] NODE_DSTR and NODE_EVSTR? — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>
How are "dynamic" strings represented internally?
7 messages
2003/08/22
Re: differences between Module and Class ?
From:
Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
Date:
2003-08-24 18:29:57 UTC
List:
ruby-core #1474
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Chad Fowler wrote: > Matju, is there any reason to do this other than idealism? Chad, wasn't the module/class distinction a similarly "idealistic" move in the first place? I mean it seems to be on the same level of thought than what I propose. Then why is the so-called "idealism" inappropriate when it comes from me? > We've beaten this thing to death in terms of why *not* to do it, I can't share this opinion. A lot may have been said, but I suspect that not so much has been understood, and certainly that few people have participated in it. You seem to have a different standard on what "beating to death" may mean. Additionally this is not a complete proposal. There is an uncertain element that may very well make the difference between a proposal that I would myself approve and one that I wouldn't, but no-one has answered me on that. Another thing I want to complete before submitting anything seriously, is to understand the current situation... so even if my proposal gets dumped, and even if I dump my proposal myself, I still want to understand the current situation correctly, and this has not happened yet. > But, why *should* this change? I've presented this already. [ruby-core:1448]. The actual advantages may get more precise as the details get more precise. > What is the real practical benefit? You mean that the reasons I've presented yet are not practical enough for you. I'm sorry I can't help you for now, especially as I don't completely understand the current situation yet, even after "beating this thing to death" as you call it. > What could we do that we can't do now? Not all changes worth doing fall into that category. Else chances are that I would have sticked with another language and never would have bothered with Ruby. ________________________________________________________________ Mathieu Bouchard http://artengine.ca/matju