Hi,
On p. 131-132 in "Programming Ruby 2d.", it talks about writing binary
data to files, but there's no explanation of the syntax:
str1 = "\001\002\003"
I looked in the index of the book, I poured over "The Ruby Language"
chapter, and I also couldn't find any escape character that was "\0".
Is that Ruby's unicode syntax? How about a ding dang explanation Mr.
Thomas?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
7stud -- wrote:
Hi,
On p. 131-132 in "Programming Ruby 2d.", it talks about writing binary
data to files, but there's no explanation of the syntax:str1 = "\001\002\003"
This is an octal escape sequence. Use it to insert an arbitrary byte
into a string.
The escape code is \n, \nn or \nnn where each n is from 0 to 7. In octal
000 is 0 and 777 is 255.
best,
Dan
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
I looked in the index of the book, I poured over "The Ruby Language"
chapter, and I also couldn't find any escape character that was "\0".
Is that Ruby's unicode syntax? How about a ding dang explanation Mr.
Thomas?
You should look in the 3rd part, chapter 22, under "The Basic Types".
Table 22.2, page 306 (in my PDF edition).
It says :
Table 22.2. Substitutions in double-quoted strings
--------------------------------------------------------------
\a Bell / alert (0x07) \nnn Octal nnn
\b Backspace (0x08) \xnn Hex nn
\e Escape (0x1b) \cx Control-x
\f Formfeed (0x0c) \C-x Control-x
\n Newline (0x0a) \M-x Meta-x
\r Return (0x0d) \M-\C-x Meta-control-x
\s Space (0x20) \x x
\t Tab (0x09) #{code} Value of code
\v Vertical tab (0x0b)
--------------------------------------------------------------
So, your example uses the octal representation.
Fred
Le 12 septembre à 13:10, 7stud -- a écrit :
--
If my son wants to be a pimp when he grows up, that's fine with me. I
hope he's a good one and enjoys it and doesn't get caught. I'll support
him in this. But if he wants to be a network administrator, he's out of
the house and not part of my family. (Steve Wozniak)
Hi
That's the way of expressing octal numbers.
On 9/12/07, 7stud -- <dolgun@excite.com> wrote:
Hi,
On p. 131-132 in "Programming Ruby 2d.", it talks about writing binary
data to files, but there's no explanation of the syntax:str1 = "\001\002\003"
I looked in the index of the book, I poured over "The Ruby Language"
chapter, and I also couldn't find any escape character that was "\0".
Is that Ruby's unicode syntax?
--
Luis Parravicini
http://ktulu.com.ar/blog/
% cheat string
string:
Ruby 1.8 String Literal
[...]
>---------+------------------|
> Format | Translation |
>---------+------------------|
> \nnn | Octal nnn |
> \xnn | Hexadecimal 0xnn |
> \cx | Control-x | Control-x == (?x & 0b10011111)
> \C-x | Control-x |
> \M-x | Meta-x | Meta-x == (?x | 0b10000000)
> \M-\C-x | Meta-control-x |
> \x | x |
> #{expr} | Value of expr |
>---------+------------------|
[...]
Steve
Daniel Lucraft wrote:In octal
000 is 0 and 777 is 255.
No it very much isn't. 377 is what I was going for there. Thank you for
being too polite to say...
Dan
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
F. Senault wrote:
Le 12 septembre � 13:10, 7stud -- a �crit :
I looked in the index of the book, I poured over "The Ruby Language"
chapter, and I also couldn't find any escape character that was "\0".
Is that Ruby's unicode syntax? How about a ding dang explanation Mr.
Thomas?You should look in the 3rd part, chapter 22, under "The Basic Types".
Table 22.2, page 306 (in my PDF edition).
Ah. I didn't realize there was a second column on the right.
Thanks everyone.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Daniel Lucraft wrote:
The escape code is \n, \nn or \nnn where each n is from 0 to 7. In octal
000 is 0 and 777 is 255.
777 is 255 ?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Does anyone know a good reason for outputting 8 bit byte characters
as octals in String#inspect?
see string.c (1.8.6):
[...]
else {
sprintf(s, "\\%03o", c & 0377);
rb_str_buf_cat2(result, s);
}
[...]
why not make it:
sprintf(s, "\\x%02x", c & 0377);
I can't understand why it is desirable to introduce yet another base
that is rarely used outside of chmod and od (without options). We
learned decimals, we got used to binary and even hex, but why do we
need octals just for these control characters when there is no
benefit compared to the hex representation (note: both take 4 chars
to display)?
- Matthias
On 12.09.2007 13:45, F. Senault wrote:
You should look in the 3rd part, chapter 22, under "The Basic Types".
Table 22.2, page 306 (in my PDF edition).It says :
> Table 22.2. Substitutions in double-quoted strings
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> \a Bell / alert (0x07) \nnn Octal nnn
> \b Backspace (0x08) \xnn Hex nn
> \e Escape (0x1b) \cx Control-x
> \f Formfeed (0x0c) \C-x Control-x
> \n Newline (0x0a) \M-x Meta-x
> \r Return (0x0d) \M-\C-x Meta-control-x
> \s Space (0x20) \x x
> \t Tab (0x09) #{code} Value of code
> \v Vertical tab (0x0b)
> --------------------------------------------------------------So, your example uses the octal representation.
Daniel Lucraft wrote:
Daniel Lucraft wrote:In octal
000 is 0 and 777 is 255.
No it very much isn't. 377 is what I was going for there. Thank you for
being too polite to say...
Dan
Try again.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
A byte is coded on 8 bits, so the maximum is 255 hence the strange
results below :
8 * 8 * 7 + 8 * 7 + 7
=> 511
"\777".inspect
=> "\377"
"\777"[0]
=> 255
"\377"[0]
=> 255
\777 is invalid and is truncated to \377.
This is pure history. The use of octal notation predates hex by a long time. In my "The C Programming Language" [1978], 0ddd and 0xddd were both valid integer literals, but only octal \ddd was valid for character constants.
In fact, there's a table of internal sizes for data types on various machines which includes the Honeywell 6000 having a 9-bit char type and 36-bit types for short, int, long, and float and 72-bit doubles. For that machine, octal representation of bit patterns makes perfect sense.
-Rob
Rob Biedenharn http://agileconsultingllc.com
Rob@AgileConsultingLLC.com
On Sep 12, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Matthias Wächter wrote:
On 12.09.2007 13:45, F. Senault wrote:
You should look in the 3rd part, chapter 22, under "The Basic Types".
Table 22.2, page 306 (in my PDF edition).It says :
> Table 22.2. Substitutions in double-quoted strings
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> \a Bell / alert (0x07) \nnn Octal nnn
> \b Backspace (0x08) \xnn Hex nn
> \e Escape (0x1b) \cx Control-x
> \f Formfeed (0x0c) \C-x Control-x
> \n Newline (0x0a) \M-x Meta-x
> \r Return (0x0d) \M-\C-x Meta-control-x
> \s Space (0x20) \x x
> \t Tab (0x09) #{code} Value of code
> \v Vertical tab (0x0b)
> --------------------------------------------------------------So, your example uses the octal representation.
Does anyone know a good reason for outputting 8 bit byte characters
as octals in String#inspect?see string.c (1.8.6):
[...]
else {
sprintf(s, "\\%03o", c & 0377);
rb_str_buf_cat2(result, s);
}
[...]why not make it:
sprintf(s, "\\x%02x", c & 0377);
I can't understand why it is desirable to introduce yet another base
that is rarely used outside of chmod and od (without options). We
learned decimals, we got used to binary and even hex, but why do we
need octals just for these control characters when there is no
benefit compared to the hex representation (note: both take 4 chars
to display)?- Matthias
Gaspard Bucher wrote:
A byte is coded on 8 bits, so the maximum is 255 hence the strange
results below :> 8 * 8 * 7 + 8 * 7 + 7
=> 511
> "\777".inspect
=> "\377"
> "\777"[0]
=> 255
> "\377"[0]
=> 255\777 is invalid and is truncated to \377.
How I represent a number eight?
sysdebug(main):024:0> "\008"[0]
=> 0
This returned 0!
Regards,
--
Jonas Roberto de Goes Filho (sysdebug)
http://goes.eti.br
Well, I understand that in history it was a popular format for
various reasons. But Ruby is now, and now we have 8 bit chars (aka
Bytes) and use hex nearly exclusively for them. Why not so in
String#inspect?
Or is the reason similar to the question why Float#to_s uses 15
instead of 17 significant bits to display? Pure convention? A (core)
developer rolling a dice somewhen? 
- Matthias
On 12.09.2007 17:28, Rob Biedenharn wrote:
On Sep 12, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Matthias Wächter wrote:
I can't understand why it is desirable to introduce yet another base
that is rarely used outside of chmod and od (without options). We
learned decimals, we got used to binary and even hex, but why do we
need octals just for these control characters when there is no
benefit compared to the hex representation (note: both take 4 chars
to display)?This is pure history.
Jonas Roberto de Goes Filho (sysdebug) wrote:
Gaspard Bucher wrote:
A byte is coded on 8 bits, so the maximum is 255 hence the strange
results below :> 8 * 8 * 7 + 8 * 7 + 7
=> 511
> "\777".inspect
=> "\377"
> "\777"[0]
=> 255
> "\377"[0]
=> 255\777 is invalid and is truncated to \377.
How I represent a number eight?
sysdebug(main):024:0> "\008"[0]
=> 0This returned 0!
8 doesn't exist in octal, so it interprets the 8 as a separate character.
irb(main):009:0> "\007".length
=> 1
irb(main):010:0> "\008".length
=> 2
--
Alex