# Say\['love'\] = "\*love\*" fails **URL:** \ **Category:** IronRuby\ **Created:** [June 21, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061 "2008-06-21T14:59:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/1 "2008-06-21T14:59:41Z")
Hello, I just wanted to quickly write some Ruby code to see if my hosting worked. Went onto the main ruby site and copied this block of code: # Output “I love Ruby” say = “I love Ruby” puts say # Output “I _LOVE_ RUBY” say[‘love’] = “_love_” puts say.upcase # Output “I _love_ Ruby” # five times 5.times { puts say } When I tried this it failed: > > > say[‘love’] = “_love_” > > > :0:in `Initialize##1': undefined local variable or method`say’ for > > > main:Object > > > (NoMethodError) I first thought this might have been because the console doesn’t support local variables and have some other problems going on. So I tried this: > > > $say[‘love’] = “_love_” > > > :0:in `Initialize##11': undefined local variable or method`[]=’ for > > > :NilClass ( > > > NoMethodError) Why isn’t this working? Thanks Ben ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 3:23pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/2 "2008-06-21T15:23:09Z")
Is this from ir.exe or from your hosting code? It looks like you didn’t start entirely over. You need to make every reference global and not just subsequent ones. That is, $say = “I love Ruby” puts $say $say[‘love’] = “_LOVE_” …etc. Also, it looks like we happen to be missing that particular overload of String.[]=, so if that’s not already in RubyForge, you should file a bug report. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 3:32pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/3 "2008-06-21T15:32:00Z")
Yes, you are correct. It tries to match your call to []= with one of the existing overloads. There’s no overload for (string, string), so the closest one it finds is (object, object) – and the implementation of (object, object) is trying to cast the first parameter to an int. ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 3:27pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/4 "2008-06-21T15:27:54Z")
Hi Curt, The same happens in both ir and my own editor. This is from ir. > > > $say = “I love Ruby” > > > =\> “I love Ruby” > > > > puts $say > > > I love Ruby > > > =\> nil > > > > $say[‘love’] = “_LOVE_” > > > IronRuby.Libraries:0:in `[]=': can't convert String into Integer (TypeError) from :0:in`Initialize##11’ This gives a different error that before - it is just because []= is missing? I’ll take a look at RubyForge and fill a bug if required later this afternoon. Thanks Ben ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 3:53pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/5 "2008-06-21T15:53:07Z")
I don’t mean to be Clintonesque, but it depends on what the meaning of the word “done” is. 🙂 Any number you hear for spec coverage is suspect as a measure of done-ness. The specs are still being added to; they’re not themselves “done”. At this point, I don’t think we expect a “1.0 final” release before the end of the year. ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2008, 3:33pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/6 "2008-06-21T15:33:46Z")
Ahh!! Thank you! Out of interest, hHow far is the language from being ‘done’? Or is that an unknown? Last I heard John mentioned 70% of the specs passing? ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2008, 10:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/7 "2008-06-22T22:55:53Z")
Thanks for the update. What is the command to run the specs on my local box? Tried this: E:\IronRuby\trunk\>rake spec (in E:/IronRuby/trunk) 2179 examples, 83 failures rake mspec doesn’t work (as reported previously). Is that just not available at the moment publicly? ---
**Author:** ![benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@benhiller](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/benhiller)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2008, 9:05pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/say-love-love-fails/141061/8 "2008-06-22T21:05:17Z")
I would clarify that by saying the core Ruby portions will probably be done before the 1.0 final. We also have a lot of work to do on defining .NET interop. We’re probably passing about 64% of the core spec’s right now, which test the builtin libraries, and about 94% of the language specs. The library spec’s are so incomplete that the number doesn’t mean anything. I’ll be working on the coverage runner, so we should be back to daily updates on that again. JD * * * From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid] On Behalf Of Curt H. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid] Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 6:52 AM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] say[‘love’] = “_love_” fails I don’t mean to be Clintonesque, but it depends on what the meaning of the word “done” is. 🙂 Any number you hear for spec coverage is suspect as a measure of done-ness. The specs are still being added to; they’re not themselves “done”. At this point, I don’t think we expect a “1.0 final” release before the end of the year.