un version 1.0.0 has been released!
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/seattlerb>
un provides unextend and uninclude to allow for a better
prototype-oriented programming experience.
Changes:
### 1.0.0 / 2008-11-07
* 1 major enhancement
* Birthday!
Why another when we already have Mixology and Mixco?
http://github.com/why/mixico/tree/master
http://www.somethingnimble.com/bliki/mixology
-7rans.
···
On Nov 7, 9:36 pm, Ryan Davis <ryand-r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
un version 1.0.0 has been released!
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/seattlerb>
un provides unextend and uninclude to allow for a better
prototype-oriented programming experience.
cfp:~ > ruby -r un -e 'puts "ruh-roh!"'
ruh-roh!
cfp:~ > head /opt/local/lib/ruby/1.8/un.rb
···
On Nov 7, 2008, at 7:36 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:
un version 1.0.0 has been released!
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/seattlerb>
un provides unextend and uninclude to allow for a better
prototype-oriented programming experience.Changes:
### 1.0.0 / 2008-11-07
* 1 major enhancement
* Birthday!
#
# = un.rb
#
# Copyright (c) 2003 WATANABE Hirofumi <eban@ruby-lang.org>
#
# This program is free software.
# You can distribute/modify this program under the same terms of Ruby.
#
# == Utilities to replace common UNIX commands in Makefiles etc
#
problem?
a @ http://codeforpeople.com/
--
we can deny everything, except that we have the possibility of being better. simply reflect on that.
h.h. the 14th dalai lama
Hi,
···
In message "Re: [ANN] un 1.0.0 Released" on Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:36:32 +0900, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> writes:
un version 1.0.0 has been released!
Ah, did you know we have a library file un.rb in the standard
distribution?
matz.
oh... the irony...
···
On Nov 7, 2008, at 23:50 , Trans wrote:
Why another when we already have Mixology and Mixco?
gah. I forgot about it... I doubt much of anyone uses the stdlib un.rb, but given this additional problem, I should still prolly rename it:
520 % ruby -e 'require "rubygems"; require "un"; p Un::VERSION'
-e:1: uninitialized constant Un (NameError)
bad
521 % ruby -e 'require "rubygems"; gem "un"; require "un"; p Un::VERSION'
"1.0.0"
good enough, but kinda lame
···
On Nov 8, 2008, at 01:43 , ara.t.howard wrote:
cfp:~ > ruby -r un -e 'puts "ruh-roh!"'
ruh-roh!problem?
I did at one point, but I forgot. Given that it requires an explicit gem activation to get picked up, I will rename it:
% ruby -e 'require "rubygems"; require "un"; p Un::VERSION'
-e:1: uninitialized constant Un (NameError)
% ruby -e 'require "rubygems"; gem "un"; require "un"; p Un::VERSION'
"1.0.0"
···
On Nov 8, 2008, at 13:19 , Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
Hi,
In message "Re: [ANN] un 1.0.0 Released" > on Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:36:32 +0900, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com > > writes:
>un version 1.0.0 has been released!
Ah, did you know we have a library file un.rb in the standard
distribution?
If you want to ask me about a project of mine, feel free. But I'm
asking you about yours, b/c I want to understand the relative merits
of the different approaches.
T.
···
On Nov 8, 8:49 am, Ryan Davis <ryand-r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
On Nov 7, 2008, at 23:50 , Trans wrote:
> Why another when we already have Mixology and Mixco?
oh... the irony...