[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Dir.bitbucket?

Berger, Daniel

8/22/2006 4:59:00 PM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobu@ruby-lang.org [mailto:nobu@ruby-lang.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 10:22 AM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: Dir.bitbucket?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> At Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:56:47 +0900,
> Berger, Daniel wrote in [ruby-talk:209874]:
> > > > > Agreed. File would be a better location for the it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Or even IO perhaps?
> > >
> > > IO isn't always associated with a certain path.
> > >
> > > I'd prefer File.null.
> >
> > That's fine with me. If we're going to keep it pure Ruby,
> perhaps we
> > could put this in FileUtils?
>
> In pure Ruby, Pathname might be the best.

That doesn't strike me as immediately intuitive. Also, I wouldn't
expect a singleton method on the Pathname class. There aren't any
currently that I recall.

How about ftools then? There we've got File instead of FileUtils.

Regards,

Dan


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.
2 Answers

Nobuyoshi Nakada

8/23/2006 3:24:00 AM

0

Hi,

At Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:59:22 +0900,
Berger, Daniel wrote in [ruby-talk:209903]:
> > > > > > Agreed. File would be a better location for the it.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Or even IO perhaps?
> > > >
> > > > IO isn't always associated with a certain path.
> > > >
> > > > I'd prefer File.null.
> > >
> > > That's fine with me. If we're going to keep it pure Ruby,
> > perhaps we
> > > could put this in FileUtils?
> >
> > In pure Ruby, Pathname might be the best.
>
> That doesn't strike me as immediately intuitive. Also, I wouldn't
> expect a singleton method on the Pathname class. There aren't any
> currently that I recall.

Agreed.

> How about ftools then? There we've got File instead of FileUtils.

ftools is obsolete.

--
Nobu Nakada

Daniel Berger

8/23/2006 6:15:00 AM

0

nobu@ruby-lang.org wrote:

<snip>
>>>> uld put this in FileUtils?
>>>>
>>> In pure Ruby, Pathname might be the best.
>>>
>> That doesn't strike me as immediately intuitive. Also, I wouldn't
>> expect a singleton method on the Pathname class. There aren't any
>> currently that I recall.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>> How about ftools then? There we've got File instead of FileUtils.
>>
>
> ftools is obsolete.
>

Maybe it's best to keep it 3rd party then. I'm going to add File.null
to the ptools package and put out the next release today or tomorrow.

http://rubyforge.org/docman/view.php/735/308/R...

Thanks all, for the feedback.

Regards,

Dan