Forum: Ruby un 1.0.0 Released

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
5a837592409354297424994e8d62f722?d=identicon&s=25 Ryan Davis (Guest)
on 2008-11-08 03:39
(Received via mailing list)
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!

* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/seattlerb>
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Thomas Sawyer (7rans)
on 2008-11-08 05:52
(Received via mailing list)
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.

Why another when we already have Mixology and Mixco?

  http://github.com/why/mixico/tree/master
  http://www.somethingnimble.com/bliki/mixology

-7rans.
1bac2e65d64faf472cf2ebc94f0f5ee0?d=identicon&s=25 Ara Howard (ahoward)
on 2008-11-08 07:46
(Received via mailing list)
On Nov 7, 2008, at 7:36 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:

> ### 1.0.0 / 2008-11-07
>
> * 1 major enhancement
>
>  * Birthday!
>
> * <http://rubyforge.org/projects/seattlerb>
>
>



cfp:~ > ruby -r un -e 'puts "ruh-roh!"'
ruh-roh!


cfp:~ > head /opt/local/lib/ruby/1.8/un.rb
#
# = 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/
5a837592409354297424994e8d62f722?d=identicon&s=25 Ryan Davis (Guest)
on 2008-11-08 14:51
(Received via mailing list)
On Nov 7, 2008, at 23:50 , Trans wrote:

> Why another when we already have Mixology and Mixco?

oh... the irony...
0ec4920185b657a03edf01fff96b4e9b?d=identicon&s=25 Yukihiro Matsumoto (Guest)
on 2008-11-08 19:22
(Received via mailing list)
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.
5a837592409354297424994e8d62f722?d=identicon&s=25 Ryan Davis (Guest)
on 2008-11-08 21:17
(Received via mailing list)
On Nov 8, 2008, at 01:43 , ara.t.howard wrote:

> cfp:~ > ruby -r un -e 'puts "ruh-roh!"'
> ruh-roh!
>
> problem?

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
5a837592409354297424994e8d62f722?d=identicon&s=25 Ryan Davis (Guest)
on 2008-11-08 21:24
(Received via mailing list)
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?

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"
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Thomas Sawyer (7rans)
on 2008-11-09 16:40
(Received via mailing list)
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...

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.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.