The initial release of English has hit the streets. English is a
Facets spin-off project --containing all the libraries related to
working with the English language and language text in general. Among
these are libraries for plural/singular noun inflection, word
filtering, obfuscation, numerals as words, roman numerals, and so on.
This is a very early release so expect the API to shift a bit as it
develops. And please, let me know if you'd like to see anything
changed or added to the library.
I hate to point this out, but isn't having "require 'english'" and "require 'English'" both being valid and completely different going to be rather confusing?
I don't mean to sound abrupt, but why are there so many spelling/grammar
errors on the main page? Missing 'for' in the first sentence, `a few',
`fantastic', `general', `handle'.. sorry. It just seems ironic for a gem
named english.
Perhaps I'm being too picky, but when someone adds a similar (or port)
library for Spanish, and Russian, and French (and so on), wouldn't it
be nice to have them all in a similar namespace?
Language::English, perhaps?
···
On Oct 12, 9:58 am, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
The initial release of English has hit the streets. English is a
Facets spin-off project --containing all the libraries related to
working with the English language and language text in general. Among
these are libraries for plural/singular noun inflection, word
filtering, obfuscation, numerals as words, roman numerals, and so on.
Well, there is no "require 'english'" but rather "require 'english/
somelib'". But despite the name overlap I think we can manage.
Besides, "English" is a rather poor name for what that library does
IMHO; and Facets has an OOP alternative called 'rbsystem' (albeit it
could still use some fine tuning).
T.
···
On Oct 12, 9:02 am, Alex Young <a...@blackkettle.org> wrote:
I hate to point this out, but isn't having "require 'english'" and
"require 'English'" both being valid and completely different going to
be rather confusing?
B/c I'm a "creative speller" and this is version 0.1. Thanks for
mentioning it though, I'll review and run a spell checker over it when
I get a chance.
T.
···
On Oct 12, 9:21 am, Arlen Christian Mart Cuss <cel...@sairyx.org> wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 00:58 +0900, Trans wrote:
> English 0.1
I don't mean to sound abrupt, but why are there so many spelling/grammar
errors on the main page? Missing 'for' in the first sentence, `a few',
`fantastic', `general', `handle'.. sorry. It just seems ironic for a gem
named english.
not only that but, on osx for one, case in-sensitive file names means that, regardless of whether you require 'english' or 'English', the first one of either type in your loadpath will be loaded:
cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r english -e 42
42
cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r English -e 42
42
so i think that users of osx will not even be able to load that via gems since the built-in English will be picked up first.
I hate to point this out, but isn't having "require 'english'" and "require 'English'" both being valid and completely different going to be rather confusing?
--
we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being better. simply reflect on that.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama
Maybe we should take a cue from perl land? Lingua::EN::*, or
Lingua::*::*.
···
On Sat, Oct 13, 2007 at 03:55:06AM +0900, Phrogz wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:58 am, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> English 0.1
>
> http://english.rubyforge.org
>
> The initial release of English has hit the streets. English is a
> Facets spin-off project --containing all the libraries related to
> working with the English language and language text in general. Among
> these are libraries for plural/singular noun inflection, word
> filtering, obfuscation, numerals as words, roman numerals, and so on.
Perhaps I'm being too picky, but when someone adds a similar (or port)
library for Spanish, and Russian, and French (and so on), wouldn't it
be nice to have them all in a similar namespace?
Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
"require 'language/english'".
Regards,
Dan
···
On Oct 12, 11:06 am, "ara.t.howard" <ara.t.how...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Alex Young wrote:
> I hate to point this out, but isn't having "require 'english'" and
> "require 'English'" both being valid and completely different going
> to be rather confusing?
not only that but, on osx for one, case in-sensitive file names means
that, regardless of whether you require 'english' or 'English', the
first one of either type in your loadpath will be loaded:
cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r english -e 42
42
cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r English -e 42
42
so i think that users of osx will not even be able to load that via
gems since the built-in English will be picked up first.
Make sure you check the code samples, too:
reqiure 'english/inflect' # require
···
On Oct 12, 10:47 am, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 12, 9:21 am, Arlen Christian Mart Cuss <cel...@sairyx.org> wrote:
> I don't mean to sound abrupt, but why are there so many spelling/grammar
> errors on the main page? Missing 'for' in the first sentence, `a few',
> `fantastic', `general', `handle'.. sorry. It just seems ironic for a gem
> named english.
B/c I'm a "creative speller" and this is version 0.1. Thanks for
mentioning it though, I'll review and run a spell checker over it when
I get a chance.
> > I hate to point this out, but isn't having "require 'english'" and
> > "require 'English'" both being valid and completely different going
> > to be rather confusing?
> not only that but, on osx for one, case in-sensitive file names means
> that, regardless of whether you require 'english' or 'English', the
> first one of either type in your loadpath will be loaded:
> cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r english -e 42
> 42
> cfp:~ > ruby -I . -r English -e 42
> 42
> so i think that users of osx will not even be able to load that via
> gems since the built-in English will be picked up first.
Bad, bad, BAD!!!
Well, it's no quite that bad. As I said there is no "require
'english'", so it should still work fine.
Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
"require 'language/english'".
That's a reasonable idea ... though I have no plans to learn Japanese
at this time
T.
···
On Oct 12, 10:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 12, 11:06 am, "ara.t.howard" <ara.t.how...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 12, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Alex Young wrote:
Ah, nice; you beat me to my suggestion. This solves both the confusion
of the 'require' issue, and also makes it forward compatible for more
libraries of a similar nature.
···
On Oct 12, 11:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
"require 'language/english'".
On Oct 12, 12:00 pm, Phrogz <phr...@mac.com> wrote:
On Oct 12, 11:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
> toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
> "require 'language/english'".
Ah, nice; you beat me to my suggestion. This solves both the confusion
of the 'require' issue, and also makes it forward compatible for more
libraries of a similar nature.
Uh.... So I'm looking into this, and I become very aware that like 80%
of libs contained in the collection really aren't English specific. So
now I ponder, is it's ok to put some libs in "language/..." rather
then "language/english/..." even though my package is called
'english'? This doesn't sit well with me, it would seem I ought to
make a package called "language" then.
T.
···
On Oct 12, 11:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
> toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
> "require 'language/english'".
inheritance, design, polymorphism
No biggie, you've got .8 more versions to go!
···
On Oct 12, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Trans wrote:
On Oct 12, 11:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
"require 'language/english'".
Uh.... So I'm looking into this, and I become very aware that like 80%
of libs contained in the collection really aren't English specific. So
now I ponder, is it's ok to put some libs in "language/..." rather
then "language/english/..." even though my package is called
'english'? This doesn't sit well with me, it would seem I ought to
make a package called "language" then.
That's probably a good idea. If English depends on some libs in
Language, just add them as dependencies to the gem.
Cheers,
Daniel
···
On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 05:02 +0900, Trans wrote:
> On Oct 12, 11:32 am, Daniel Berger <djber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Keep the project name, but rename the library. Personally, I think a
> > toplevel namespace of "Language" is in order. Then end users could
> > "require 'language/english'".
Uh.... So I'm looking into this, and I become very aware that like 80%
of libs contained in the collection really aren't English specific. So
now I ponder, is it's ok to put some libs in "language/..." rather
then "language/english/..." even though my package is called
'english'? This doesn't sit well with me, it would seem I ought to
make a package called "language" then.
and this is version 0.1. Thanks for