[#1651] A min/max bug? — "Christoph" <chr_news@...>
Hi,
[#1690] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — Elliott Hughes <ehughes@...>
In effect. I mean that if a method's interface is getting too complicated,
In article <AD4480A509455343AEFACCC231BA850F17C358@ukexchange>,
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 07:51:42PM +0900, Tanaka Akira wrote:
[#1699] FileUtils bug and fix — Chad Fowler <chad@...>
As posted in ruby-talk:85349, I believe there is a bug in FileUtils.cp's
[#1706] gc_sweep in Ruby 1.8 — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>
I posted about this before but Matz wanted me to post more detail.
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
[#1711] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Tanaka Akira:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 07:12 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 08:26 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 09:32 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sunday 23 November 2003 11:13 pm, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 05:32:09AM +0900, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
[#1716] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Tanaka Akira:
[#1718] Re: open-uri patch, added progress_proc hook — Elliott Hughes <ehughes@...>
In article <AD4480A509455343AEFACCC231BA850F17C434@ukexchange>,
On Saturday 22 November 2003 04:34 pm, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311221024.05642.transami@runbox.com>,
On Sunday 23 November 2003 02:24 am, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311230325.21687.transami@runbox.com>,
On Sunday 23 November 2003 03:10 pm, Tanaka Akira wrote:
In article <200311230648.41003.transami@runbox.com>,
On Monday 24 November 2003 03:19, Tanaka Akira wrote:
Sean E Russell [mailto:ser@germane-software.com] wrote:
[#1753] gc_sweep under 1.8 ... not syck.so — Richard Kilmer <rich@...>
We still encountered a gc_sweep in our use of Ruby 1.8 on Linux (v8).
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
Yes, there are several (Ruby) threads working during this gc_sweep.
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
of course this effects 300 machines ;-)
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
The saga continues:
>>>>> "R" == Richard Kilmer <rich@infoether.com> writes:
There is a discussion (found by chad fowler) on ruby-dev (22000)
[#1755] Re: Controlled block variables — Jamis Buck <jgb3@...>
On Mon, 2003-11-24 at 02:04, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 05:22 pm, Jamis Buck wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 11:51, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 06:40 pm, Sean E Russell wrote:
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 14:02, T. Onoma wrote:
On Monday 24 November 2003 09:15 pm, Sean E Russell wrote:
[#1799] Syck install on Debian Standard (Ruby 1.6.7) — "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Hi, I'm having some trouble installing Syck on Debain (woody). I'm not
On Friday 28 November 2003 09:17 am, T. Onoma wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 05:22:48PM +0900, T. Onoma wrote:
[#1819] Re: configure.in: do not override CCDLDFLAGS, LDFLAGS, XLDFLAGS — Eric Sunshine <sunshine@...>
Hello,
Re: Controlled block variables
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:34:14 +0900, Chad Fowler wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>> A classic of evaluating strings is evaluating SQL code, [...]
>> the "?" placeholder has been introduced specially for that
>> purpose. In this case, it's almost the same situation, but about
>> embedding Ruby code into Ruby code.
> There's a big conceptual difference between what is happening with
> SQL and what is happening when you eval something. I view the SQL
> scenario as being not much different than any other interpreter.
> Part of the difference is host/eval language differences (do you
> ever eval SQL inside an engine which is written in SQL?) but more
> importantly, eval'ing is generally (including the case of Ruby,
> something that is delegated from one piece of code back up to the
> engine which parsed itself. I don't see this as being related, but
> it's possible that I'm missing something.
I've been thinking about this, and I *would* like to see a way to do
"parameterized" eval.
Basically, when I did some work on RSS handling, I took some meta
code and parameterized it. It looks something like:
ACCESSOR_METHODS = %Q{self.rss_<type>_list << "<symbol>"}
def make_method(symbol, type) #:nodoc:
module_eval ACCESSOR_METHODS.gsub(/<symbol>/,
symbol.id2name).gsub(/<type>/, type)
end
def rss_element(*symbols) #:nodoc:
symbols.each { |symbol| make_method(symbol, "element") }
end
The children of this class would do something like:
attr_accessor :foo
rss_element :foo
Now, this case is relatively simple, as I can simply do string
substitutions, but if I wanted anything more than a string
substitution, I'd have to do something more complex (perhaps
marshaling).
I'm not sure that I'd want to see:
ACCESSOR_METHODS = %Q{self.rss_?_list << "?"}
def rss_element(*symbols)
symbols.each { |symbol|
module_eval(ACCESSOR_METHODS, "element", symbol.id2name)
end
end
It wouldn't work, anyway, since ? is a valid character in Ruby for
three different contexts. But could there not be a way of doing
parameterized evals?
-austin
--
austin ziegler * austin@halostatue.ca * Toronto, ON, Canada
software designer * pragmatic programmer * 2003.11.28
* 08.29.55