[ANN] Rio 0.3.4

Yep that was it, good catch!!

Stefan Lang wrote:

···

On Sunday 11 September 2005 23:19, Jim Morris wrote:

I also see a similar problem with 0.3.4 but I installed it the old
fashioned way not using gem... (0.3.3 works fine BTW)

ruby t.rb
     

/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rio/ops/either.rb:110:in
`require': No such file toload -- Pathname (LoadError)
   
The "pathname" library comes with Ruby. Perhaps rio was tested
on Windows only, which ignores case in file names. Thus, on
Windows both work: require 'pathname and require 'Pathname',
but on Linux, only the former works (since Linux file systems
are case sensitive).

HTH,
Stefan

Lloyd Zusman wrote:

Wybo Dekker <wybo@servalys.nl> writes:
I found a work-around for this problem, but I don't understand why it
fixes it, and why the module wasn't functioning properly in the first
place.

I still can't reproduce this. The Rio software is broken up over many
(perhaps too many) files, and somehow you got to code that was
including that module before it was evalutated by the interpreter. I
think your patch is right on target. That code really should be right
where you put it. I have made that change permanent -- it will be in
the next release. Thanks!

Cheers,
-Christopher

Jim Morris wrote:

>Perhaps rio was tested on Windows only.

Cygwin, actually, which has the same behaviour regarding the
case-sensitivity of paths. I have changed the offending (and
offensive) require statement. Great catch.

Cheers
-Christopher

"rio4ruby" <rio4ruby@rubyforge.org> writes:

Lloyd Zusman wrote:

Wybo Dekker <wybo@servalys.nl> writes:
I found a work-around for this problem, but I don't understand why it
fixes it, and why the module wasn't functioning properly in the first
place.

I still can't reproduce this. The Rio software is broken up over many
(perhaps too many) files, and somehow you got to code that was
including that module before it was evalutated by the interpreter. I
think your patch is right on target. That code really should be right
where you put it. I have made that change permanent -- it will be in
the next release. Thanks!

Cheers,
-Christopher

I'm glad to help :slight_smile:

I'm wondering if this behavior has something to do with the way that the
gem system evaluates files that it includes. This might have some
subtle idiosyncracies.

But anyway, it works now, and that's what's most important. All's well
that ends well!

Thanks.

···

--
Lloyd Zusman
ljz@asfast.com
God bless you.