> Hi, > > 2010/3/5 Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk>: > >> At first glance, the document explains the difference of destructive > >> and non-destructive concatenations, like String#+ and #...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
> Hi, > > 2010/3/5 Hugh Sasse <hgs@dmu.ac.uk>: > > Yes (last time I looked), but while this sort of thing is > > being looked at I'd like to remind people of the cunning code in...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
=begin On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Kornelius Kalnbach wrote:
> Doesn't Ruby allocate already using a "double memory if you run out" > rule? That makes string concatenation (amortized) linear, even if the > string must be moved in the memor...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
=begin On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Vincent Isambart wrote:
> > The objections to this feature amounted to "it's complicated for users to understand and no-one needs it". Which would be a perfectly valid justification if true, but clearly Mic...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
> Hi, > > 2010/3/2 Marc-Andre Lafortune <redmine@ruby-lang.org>: > > I feel the name select! is as appropriate as map! , collect! and reject! > > Some feel appropriate, and some i...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
=begin I got tripped up by redmine there: I thought that was going off list, but while the name of the addressee was there, the address was the redmine one, which I didn't notice. I'd argue that is a misfeature.
> Issue #2515 has been updated by Roger Pack. [...] > Currently we are forced to use reject! which is surprising... [...] > But it surprisingly doesn't exist (reject h...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
=begin Composing my email crossed with yours. Yes, I think that rubyforge ticket you link to would cover it. A quick prod of dln.c suggests it is dln_find_1 we are talking about.
Is there a way to expose this mechanism to mkm...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
> Issue #2669 has been updated by Luis Lavena. > > > Neither cygwin or MSYS (which is based in cygwin) likes batch files, that is one of the reasons is not marked as executable. > ...hgs (Hugh Sasse)
hgs (Hugh Sasse)07:07 PM Ruby Feature #905: Add String.new(fixnum) to preallocate large buffer