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


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Where to find RoR exceptions ?

user@domain.invalid

10/3/2006 1:21:00 PM

Hello, where can I find a extensive list of the exceptions classes
defined by Rails ?

There's nothing in the API doc

Thanks by advance
8 Answers

Paul Battley

10/3/2006 1:43:00 PM

0

On 03/10/06, Zouplaz <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Hello, where can I find a extensive list of the exceptions classes
> defined by Rails ?
>
> There's nothing in the API doc

You can make one:

% script/console
>> ObjectSpace.each_object(Class) do |e| p e if
e.ancestors.include?(Exception); end

Subtracting the exception classes that exist before Rails's libraries
are included is left as an exercise for the reader. ;-)

Paul.

user@domain.invalid

10/4/2006 8:37:00 AM

0

le 03/10/2006 15:43, Paul Battley nous a dit:
> On 03/10/06, Zouplaz <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>> Hello, where can I find a extensive list of the exceptions classes
>> defined by Rails ?
>>
>> There's nothing in the API doc
>
> You can make one:
>
> % script/console
>>> ObjectSpace.each_object(Class) do |e| p e if
> e.ancestors.include?(Exception); end
>
> Subtracting the exception classes that exist before Rails's libraries
> are included is left as an exercise for the reader. ;-)
>
> Paul.
>

Thanks a lot !

Barack Hussein Bohica

7/5/2012 11:52:00 AM

0

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:33:07 -0700, Billy <wildbilly@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In article <aek7v79qtaejbojookc32kou0ar9rb6iek@4ax.com>,
> 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
> <CharlieFoxtrot@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:04:50 -0700, "Baxter"
>> <baxter.spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Yer Pal Al" <caddyshack.al@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a-878a-78e6cfd41750@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> >>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>> >>much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>> >
>> >Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.
>>
>> Only because he somehow managed not to fuck up the mechanism set in
>> place by his predecessor.
>>
>> >He tried to save GM ... and he did.
>>
>> Only because GM is still propped up by Obamamoney.
>>
>> >His signature legislation ACA ... is
>> >Constitutional. Some loser!
>>
>> And will be his spectacular downfall. That fuckwit couldn't tell the
>> truth if it was stapled to his teleprompter.
>
>Invective, and opinion, is blovination all you got? You know what they
>say about opinion. You sound like a "Bagger". Got any "real world" facts
>that you can back up with a credible source(s)?

You have an amazing talent for projecting your own hypocrisy onto your
betters.

Source: Your own words.

Billy

7/5/2012 4:47:00 PM

0

In article <8rvav7tfhdkpvposbh0qsvarkamlpd4rul@4ax.com>,
254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<CharlieFoxtrot@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:33:07 -0700, Billy <wildbilly@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <aek7v79qtaejbojookc32kou0ar9rb6iek@4ax.com>,
> > 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
> > <CharlieFoxtrot@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:04:50 -0700, "Baxter"
> >> <baxter.spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Yer Pal Al" <caddyshack.al@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a-878a-78e6cfd41750@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> >>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> >> >>much as we are voting against a certified loser.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.
> >>
> >> Only because he somehow managed not to fuck up the mechanism set in
> >> place by his predecessor.
> >>
> >> >He tried to save GM ... and he did.
> >>
> >> Only because GM is still propped up by Obamamoney.
> >>
> >> >His signature legislation ACA ... is
> >> >Constitutional. Some loser!
> >>
> >> And will be his spectacular downfall. That fuckwit couldn't tell the
> >> truth if it was stapled to his teleprompter.
> >
> >Invective, and opinion, is blovination all you got? You know what they
> >say about opinion. You sound like a "Bagger". Got any "real world" facts
> >that you can back up with a credible source(s)?
>
> You have an amazing talent for projecting your own hypocrisy onto your
> betters.
>
> Source: Your own words.

In my own words, you're full of shit and all you have are invectives,
dissembling, and prevarication. You're just another "Bagger" who is
proud of his profound ignorance.

People accustomed to hearing their president explain complicated policy
choices by snapping "I'm the decider" may find it almost impossible to
imagine the pains that Franklin D. Roosevelt took, in the grim months
after Pearl Harbor, to explain why U.S. armed forces were suffering one
defeat after another in the Pacific. In February 1942, Roosevelt urged
Americans to spread out a map during his radio "fireside chat" so that
they might better understand the geography of battle. In stores
throughout the country, maps sold out; about 80 percent of American
adults tuned in to hear the president. FDR had told his speechwriters
that he was certain that if Americans understood the immensity of the
distances over which supplies had to travel to the armed forces, "they
can take any kind of bad news right on the chin."

This is a portrait of a different country and citizenry, one that lacked
access to satellite-enhanced Google maps but was far more receptive to
learning and complexity than today's public. According to a 2006 survey
by National Geographic-Roper, nearly half of Americans between ages 18
and 24 do not think it necessary to know the location of other countries
in which important news is being made. More than a third consider it
"not at all important" to know a foreign language, and only 14 percent
consider it "very important."

That leads us to the third and final factor behind the new American
dumbness: not lack of knowledge per se but arrogance about that lack of
knowledge. The problem is not just the things we do not know (consider
the one in five American adults who, according to the National Science
Foundation, thinks the sun revolves around the Earth); it's the alarming
number of Americans who have smugly concluded that they do not need to
know such things in the first place. Call this anti-rationalism -- a
syndrome that is particularly dangerous to our public institutions and
discourse. Not knowing a foreign language or the location of an
important country is a manifestation of ignorance; denying that such
knowledge matters is pure anti-rationalism. The toxic brew of
anti-rationalism and ignorance hurts discussions of U.S. public policy
on topics from health care to taxation.

There is no quick cure for this epidemic of arrogant anti-rationalism
and anti-intellectualism; rote efforts to raise standardized test scores
by stuffing students with specific answers to specific questions on
specific tests will not do the job. Moreover, the people who exemplify
the problem are usually oblivious to it. ("Hardly anyone believes
himself to be against thought and culture," Hofstadter noted.) It is
past time for a serious national discussion about whether, as a nation,
we truly value intellect and rationality. If this indeed turns out to be
a "change election," the low level of discourse in a country with a mind
taught to aim at low objects ought to be the first item on the change
agenda.
---

I'm talking about you, Mary.

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.

Welcome to the New America.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736...

Sancho Panza

7/5/2012 10:46:00 PM

0

On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Billy wrote:

> Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and
> production incentives.

They don't benefit anywhere near as much proportionately as those who
don't pay any income taxes whatsoever yet reap the benefits of a
generous society.

Billy

7/5/2012 11:32:00 PM

0

In article <4ff61917$0$6065$607ed4bc@cv.net>,
Sancho Panza <otterpower@xhotmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Billy wrote:
>
> > Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and
> > production incentives.
>
> They don't benefit anywhere near as much proportionately as those who
> don't pay any income taxes whatsoever yet reap the benefits of a
> generous society.

So it's OK to give money to Banks and other corporations, who just sit
on the money while hard working Americans have to sit on their hands for
lack of jobs. If many people think like that then America is finished.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-sto...
ntain-cash/story?id=10250559#.T_SjOHDcsnU>
Hoarding, Not Hiring ? Corporations Stockpile Mountain of Cash

<http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-12/news/31146859_1...
-crisis-banks-lending-money>
Meanwhile, The Fed's Still Paying Banks Not To Lend...

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.

Welcome to the New America.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736...

Sancho Panza

7/6/2012 2:27:00 AM

0

On 7/5/2012 7:32 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article<4ff61917$0$6065$607ed4bc@cv.net>,
> Sancho Panza<otterpower@xhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Billy wrote:
>>
>>> Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and
>>> production incentives.
>>
>> They don't benefit anywhere near as much proportionately as those who
>> don't pay any income taxes whatsoever yet reap the benefits of a
>> generous society.
>
> So it's OK to give money to Banks and other corporations, who just sit
> on the money while hard working Americans have to sit on their hands for
> lack of jobs. If many people think like that then America is finished.

How do you think banks make profits? Clue: It is not those "who sit on
the money."

>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-sto...
> ntain-cash/story?id=10250559#.T_SjOHDcsnU>
> Hoarding, Not Hiring ? Corporations Stockpile Mountain of Cash
>
> <http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-12/news/31146859_1...
> -crisis-banks-lending-money>
> Meanwhile, The Fed's Still Paying Banks Not To Lend...

Not really. But Obama/Bernanke/Geithner have established one of the
outright stupidest financial programs ever, as your last cite notes:

"One of the most annoying U.S. government policies these days is the
Federal Reserve's decision to pay big banks not to lend money.
This bank handout continues while average Americans who have been
responsible and lived within their means earn nothing on their savings.
The Fed initiated this pay-for-no-lending program during the financial
crisis, when it decided to pay big banks interest on their "excess
reserves."

What are "excess reserves"?

Money that the banks aren't lending out--money that banks are just
keeping on deposit at the Fed.
The Fed is paying banks 0.25% interest on this money.
0.25% interest isn't much, but it's more than the banks are paying you
to keep money in your savings or money-market account."

If you are receiving less than one-quarter of one percent, that is not
being very savvy about deploying one's assets.

Barack Hussein Bohica

7/6/2012 7:06:00 AM

0

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 09:46:52 -0700, Billy <wildbilly@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In article <8rvav7tfhdkpvposbh0qsvarkamlpd4rul@4ax.com>,
> 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
> <CharlieFoxtrot@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:33:07 -0700, Billy <wildbilly@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <aek7v79qtaejbojookc32kou0ar9rb6iek@4ax.com>,
>> > 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
>> > <CharlieFoxtrot@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:04:50 -0700, "Baxter"
>> >> <baxter.spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"Yer Pal Al" <caddyshack.al@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a-878a-78e6cfd41750@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> >>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>> >> >>much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.
>> >>
>> >> Only because he somehow managed not to fuck up the mechanism set in
>> >> place by his predecessor.
>> >>
>> >> >He tried to save GM ... and he did.
>> >>
>> >> Only because GM is still propped up by Obamamoney.
>> >>
>> >> >His signature legislation ACA ... is
>> >> >Constitutional. Some loser!
>> >>
>> >> And will be his spectacular downfall. That fuckwit couldn't tell the
>> >> truth if it was stapled to his teleprompter.
>> >
>> >Invective, and opinion, is blovination all you got? You know what they
>> >say about opinion. You sound like a "Bagger". Got any "real world" facts
>> >that you can back up with a credible source(s)?
>>
>> You have an amazing talent for projecting your own hypocrisy onto your
>> betters.
>>
>> Source: Your own words.
>
>In my own words, you're full of shit and all you have are invectives,
>dissembling, and prevarication. You're just another "Bagger" who is
>proud of his profound ignorance.

Yes. Your own hypocritical words.

Rest of your cut'n'paste snipped due to excessive boredom.