ruby-core

Well, it looks like the Temporal mixin is ready to go. Should I submit the
patch to the ruby-core tracker on RubyForge, or is it already officially up
for consideration in it's current location?

2008/1/25 Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>:

> At 11:38 08/01/25, Jim Cropcho wrote:
> >Does anyone think that it is a good idea to include similar methods for
> japanese/east asian languages?
>
> I don't think so. Ruby doesn't localize it's method names.
> If things are clear in simple English (as they are in your case),
> it should be fine.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
>
> >I'm not too familiar with japanese/localization in ruby-core. Would that
> go in the same module, or a different one?
> >
> >Any naming scheme that helps visualize is good. How can we make this work
> best for the great number of locales?
> >
> >2008/1/24 Jim Cropcho <<mailto:jim.cropcho@gmail.com>
> jim.cropcho@gmail.com >:
> >>Here is the newest patch. It creates a module called Temporal which
> contains functionality useful to classes which define temporal objects, such
> as dates and times. However, its intended scope is *not* limited to object
> comparison. It is handy in this regard, though, because it addresses
> differences between languages, as several in this thread have noted.
> >>
> >>The module is added to the compilation configuration, and unit tests are
> included, all of which pass. The module is included in the classes Time and
> Date (and DateTime, via extension).
> >>
> >>The module does not include the methods past? and present?, as intended,
> because the means of determining "now" is different even at the conceptual
> level between temporal classes. For example, "now" to Time is the number of
> microseconds after epoch, but "now" to Date is the current calendar date. It
> is my opinion that past?/future? functionality should be implemented at the
> class level.
> >>
> >>Please give my concept and source code consideration for being entered
> into the ruby core, and suggest modifications/additions at will.
> >>
> >>
> >>Jim Cropcho
> >>
> >>2008/1/23 Jim Cropcho < <mailto:jim.cropcho@gmail.com>
> jim.cropcho@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>>A new thought:
> >>>
> >>>> The way that the <=> method is rewritten for Time, it is
> >>>> optimized (as far as I can tell) to evaluate conditions
> >>>> based on nanoseconds only when equality cannot be
> >>>> determined via seconds. I may be misreading that.
> >>>>
> >>>> Conversely, Time inherits its > and < methods from its superclass,
> >>>> so surely those optimizations in <=> do not exist, and creating
> >>>> aliases would yield less-optimized code. Also, in the other classes
> >>>> where I add this functionality, current techniques to optimize
> >>>> comparisons will be reimplemented using the local methodology.
> >>>
> >>>from the rdoc for compar.c:
> >>>
> >>>The <http://ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Comparable.html>Comparable mixin
> is used by classes whose objects may be ordered. The class must define the
> <=> operator, which compares the receiver against another object, returning
> -1, 0, or +1 depending on whether the receiver is less than, equal to, or
> greater than the other object. <
> http://ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Comparable.html>Comparable uses <=> to
> implement the conventional comparison operators (<, <=, ==, >=, and >) and
> the method <http://ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Comparable.html#M007548
> >between?.
> >>>
> >>>I am now writing a Mixin called Temporal which will be included in the
> Time , Date and DateTime classes, and will contain the instance methods
> >>>
> >>>*before?(some_time)
> >>>*after?(some_time)
> >>>*future?(time = Time.now)
> >>>*past?(time = Time.now)
> >>>
> >>>I have the tests written and skeleton code to compile and include the
> module where necessary. I hope to be finished tomorrow.
> >>>
> >>>2008/1/23 Mathieu Blondel <<mailto:mblondel@rubyforge.org>
> mblondel@rubyforge.org >:
> >>>>Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>>2008/1/23, Martin Duerst < <mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> There is even some cultural dependency here. In Japanese, for
> example,
> >>>>> the past is higher than the future, time flows down,
> >>>>
> >>>>And in Chinese as well. For example:
> >>>>
> >>>>下个星期 = next week, lit. below week
> >>>>上个星期 = last week, lit. above week
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Mathieu
>
>
> #-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
> #-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
>
>
>

Thread

Prev Next

In This Thread

Prev Next