About 6 months ago or so, I rewrote the Pathname library to internally
store a path as an Array instead of a String. It appears to be about
20% faster than the original and the code is a good bit less complex. I
no longer subscribte to ruby-dev and I'm not sure who is responsible
for such things, so I'm posting here. Would a Ruby developer like to
have a look and consider it as an update of the current lib?
Thanks,
T.
Hi,
akr-san is responsible for pathname library.
matz.
In message "Re: Pathname" on Sun, 28 May 2006 11:56:05 +0900, transfire@gmail.com writes:
About 6 months ago or so, I rewrote the Pathname library to internally
store a path as an Array instead of a String. It appears to be about
20% faster than the original and the code is a good bit less complex. I
no longer subscribte to ruby-dev and I'm not sure who is responsible
for such things, so I'm posting here. Would a Ruby developer like to
have a look and consider it as an update of the current lib?Thanks,
T.
In article <1148784962.397850.112760@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
transfire@gmail.com writes:
About 6 months ago or so, I rewrote the Pathname library to internally
store a path as an Array instead of a String. It appears to be about
20% faster than the original and the code is a good bit less complex. I
no longer subscribte to ruby-dev and I'm not sure who is responsible
for such things, so I'm posting here. Would a Ruby developer like to
have a look and consider it as an update of the current lib?
I don't like it. A pathname may have different structure on
different environment.
I think rewriting it in C is appropriate way to make it faster.
--
Tanaka Akira
Tanaka wrote:
I think rewriting it in C is appropriate way to make it faster.
I won't disagree with you there. So if that's in the works than no
worries.
Two thoughts though. I liked being about to use << to add to a path.
Eg.
pn = Pathname.new('a/b')
pn << 'c'
pn #=> #<Pathname:a/b/c>
Some other array-like methods seem useful too, #each for instance.
More importantly, I think it would be nice if there were a shorter way
to define a path, perhaps a percent literal like %p{a/b}. Haing to
spell out Pathname.new all the time deters one from using it over a
simple String and the File class methods.
Thanks for responding Tanaka,
T.
transfire@gmail.com wrote:
Tanaka wrote:
I think rewriting it in C is appropriate way to make it faster.
I won't disagree with you there. So if that's in the works than no
worries.Two thoughts though. I liked being about to use << to add to a path.
Eg.pn = Pathname.new('a/b')
pn << 'c'
pn #=> #<Pathname:a/b/c>Some other array-like methods seem useful too, #each for instance.
The pathname2 package already does this (although you use '+' instead of '<<').
More importantly, I think it would be nice if there were a shorter way
to define a path, perhaps a percent literal like %p{a/b}.
Good idea. I'm stealing it for pathname2. 
Regards,
Dan
Daniel Berger wrote:
<snip>
More importantly, I think it would be nice if there were a shorter way
to define a path, perhaps a percent literal like %p{a/b}.Good idea. I'm stealing it for pathname2.
Well, I would have stolen it, except that I forgot that there's no way to define % literals in Ruby 1.8 afaik. I'm not sure about 1.9.
Related RCR: RCR 279: User defined % literals
Regards,
Dan
transfire@gmail.com wrote:
Well, is this close enough?
module Kernel
def pn(s)
Pathname.new(s)
end
end
pn %{a/b}
It almost looks like a % literal.
On May 30, 2006, at 12:55 AM, Daniel Berger wrote:
Daniel Berger wrote:
transfire@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>
More importantly, I think it would be nice if there were a shorter way
to define a path, perhaps a percent literal like %p{a/b}.Good idea. I'm stealing it for pathname2.
Well, I would have stolen it, except that I forgot that there's no way to define % literals in Ruby 1.8 afaik. I'm not sure about 1.9.
Related RCR: RCR 279: User defined % literals
Regards,
Dan
Although you just end up doing this
pn('a/b')
when it's within other calls anyway. Plus it's yet another pass through
kernel method. Maybe this would be better:
$P = lambda { |s| Pathname.new(s) }
$P['a/b']
Just a thought.
T.
class << Pathname
alias new
end
Pathname['a/b']
P = Pathname
P['a/b']
2006/5/31, transfire@gmail.com <transfire@gmail.com>:
$P = lambda { |s| Pathname.new(s) }
$P['a/b']
--
Nobu Nakada