Hi,
I am new to ruby, and I would like to know whether there is something
for Ruby that can help me interact with/automate other programs like
Expect for Tcl?
Thanks in advance
MT
Hello,
Some time ago I started a module to use libexpect from ruby but I finished
the project that was using it and discontinued to support it. If you or any
other wants to continue it I can help a bit.
This is the RAA link → http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/raa-list.rhtml?id=470
Bye
···
On Wed 27 Nov 2002 08:29, Minh Tang wrote:
Hi,
I am new to ruby, and I would like to know whether there is something
for Ruby that can help me interact with/automate other programs like
Expect for Tcl?Thanks in advance
MT
–
Javier Fontan Muiños
jfontan@cesga.es
CESGA, Galicia Supercomputing Center
Minh Tang wrote:
Hi,
I am new to ruby, and I would like to know whether there is something
for Ruby that can help me interact with/automate other programs like
Expect for Tcl?Thanks in advance
MT
There is an expect module out on the RAA (www.ruby-lang.org/en/raa.html)
if that helps.
Regards,
Dan
Hi all,
I got burned by this mistake:
3…5.times{ puts “yo” } -> what do you think this will do?
Only the -w flag warns me that I might be doing something wrong here.
The questions I have are:
- Should ‘times’ be modified to support ranges?
- If not, should it raise a NameError exception?
Regards,
Dan
1) Should 'times' be modified to support ranges?
Well, you want #upto no ?
2) If not, should it raise a NameError exception?
I've not understood why you want a NameError, #times return its argument
Guy Decoux
3…5.times{ puts “yo” } → what do you think this will do?
I think that it will be parsed as
3…(5.times{ puts “yo” })
That is, Ruby will do ‘5.times{ puts “yo” }’, then it will return 5
(that’s what 5.times returns), and use that 5 to do a ‘3…5’. since
that 3…5 is not doing anything, you would not notice it.
This might illustrate what you ean.
( 3…5.times{ puts “yo” } ).to_a.each { |n| puts n}
Prints:
yo
yo
yo
yo
yo
3
4
5
Hello,
You should put the range inside ().
(3…5).times { puts “yo” }
I think that rubi first evaluates 5.times { puts “yo” } before the range so
the range is 3…(5.times {puts “yo”}) and so the error.
Bye
···
On Wed 27 Nov 2002 16:38, Daniel Berger wrote:
Hi all,
I got burned by this mistake:
3…5.times{ puts “yo” } → what do you think this will do?
Only the -w flag warns me that I might be doing something wrong here.
The questions I have are:
- Should ‘times’ be modified to support ranges?
- If not, should it raise a NameError exception?
Regards,
Dan
–
Javier Fontan Muiños
jfontan@cesga.es
CESGA, Galicia Supercomputing Center
Hi,
Thanks alot for the info.
Javier Fontan wrote:
···
Hello,
Some time ago I started a module to use libexpect from ruby but I finished
the project that was using it and discontinued to support it. If you or any
other wants to continue it I can help a bit.This is the RAA link → http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/raa-list.rhtml?id=470
Bye
On Wed 27 Nov 2002 08:29, Minh Tang wrote:
Hi,
I am new to ruby, and I would like to know whether there is something
for Ruby that can help me interact with/automate other programs like
Expect for Tcl?Thanks in advance
MT
I've not understood why you want a NameError, #times return its argument
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
return self
Sorry,
Guy Decoux
ts wrote:
- Should ‘times’ be modified to support ranges?
Well, you want #upto no ?
Yes, I realize that. I was just making a point. 
- If not, should it raise a NameError exception?
I’ve not understood why you want a NameError, #times return its argument
Guy Decoux
Because ‘times’ should fail when called by an invalid type (in this case a
Range object). Ruby doesn’t parse it that way it seems - I just thought it
should.
To answer you and the others who posted: I understand why it’s doing what
it does - I’m just wondering if the behavior should (or could) be changed.
Javier Fontan wrote:
(3…5).times { puts “yo” }
Actually, this syntactic approach does cause a NameError.
Regards,
Dan
Because 'times' should fail when called by an invalid type (in this case a
Range object). Ruby doesn't parse it that way it seems - I just thought it
should.
You want an error, with this
3..5*3
Guy Decoux
ts wrote:
Because ‘times’ should fail when called by an invalid type (in this case a
Range object). Ruby doesn’t parse it that way it seems - I just thought it
should.You want an error, with this
3…5*3
Guy Decoux
Is that a terse way of telling me it’s a precedence issue? 
To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to expect with that code, but I understand the
result.
Ok, then. What about allowing Ranges to be used with ‘times’?
(3…5).times{…} → alias for 3.upto(5){…}
I’m not really pushing for this - just curious what you think. Horrible idea?
Regards,
Dan
Ok, then. What about allowing Ranges to be used with 'times'?
(3..5).times{...} -> alias for 3.upto(5){...}
Well, actually #upto is defined only for Integer and String (I
think). Range can be constructed with any types, this mean that in this
case #upto will be defined for any object, no ?
Guy Decoux
There’s always each - (3…5).each {|i| p i}
‘times’ doesn’t sound like it iterates over the range. If I had to
define it it’d pick a random number from the range and iterate that many
times
martin
···
Daniel Berger djberge@qwest.com wrote:
Ok, then. What about allowing Ranges to be used with ‘times’?
(3…5).times{…} → alias for 3.upto(5){…}
I’m not really pushing for this - just curious what you think.
Horrible idea?