[#927] UnboundMethod#to_proc — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
I'm wondering what I can do with a Proc generated by
17 messages
2003/04/06
[#929] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— "Chris Pine" <nemo@...>
2003/04/06
----- Original Message -----
[#934] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
2003/04/06
[#940] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— chr_news@...
2003/04/07
>
[#941] Re: UnboundMethod#to_proc
— Dave Thomas <dave@...>
2003/04/07
>> If they have diverging interfaces such that the contracts conflict
[#936] docs on implementation of ruby and/or ruby-gc ? — Ruben Vandeginste <Ruben.Vandeginste@...>
4 messages
2003/04/07
[#964] Range in logical context — Dave Thomas <dave@...>
If I run
7 messages
2003/04/16
[#965] Re: Range in logical context
— Mauricio Fern疣dez <batsman.geo@...>
2003/04/16
On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 06:10:40AM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote:
[#973] problem with rb_rescue2() ? — Mathieu Bouchard <matju@...>
5 messages
2003/04/19
Re: Range in logical context
From:
matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date:
2003-04-17 02:50:17 UTC
List:
ruby-core #968
Hi,
In message "Re: Range in logical context"
on 03/04/17, nobu.nokada@softhome.net <nobu.nokada@softhome.net> writes:
|> I assumed that was referring to stuff with an implicit $_ or $., such as
|>
|> print if 10..20
|>
|> or
|>
|> print if /cat/../dog/
|>
|> I'm not sure I see the reason for deprecating the more general form.
|
|Exactly. And some new nodes are not warned.
Oops, could you commit this fix?
matz.