[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Access Control confusion

Chang Min Jeon

1/1/2009 1:52:00 PM

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

I read Ruby User's Guide <http://www.rubyist.net/~slagell...
created by Yukihiro Matsumoto

http://www.rubyist.net/~slagell/ruby/accessco...

and i have a question about access control.
Access Control section explain method following code.

>* def square(n)*
|* n * n*
|* end*

Object class has square method.

But it is not allowed access of square method following document.

We are not allowed to explicitly apply the method to an object:

ruby>* "fish".square(5)*
*ERR: (eval):1: private method `square' called for "fish":String*

But it is operated when i write code above in ruby 1.8.7

What is the matter ?
wrong document ?



--
CashFlow
To be rich.

3 Answers

Jim Mitchell

12/31/2008 10:26:00 PM

0


"SMBalloon" <smballoon@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1eknl4dhh0g3p931ol218e0cemp63j220i@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:09:04 -0600, "Jim Mitchell"
> <jnjmitchREMOVE@swbell.net> wrote:
>
>>In my
>>limited understanding of business and economics, the pros of a Wal-Mart
>>(marginally lower priced goods made available to working people) are
>>outweighed by the overall negative impact to a community and to our
>>economy.
>
>
>
> The Ultimate pro-WalMart Article: http://www.mises.org/s...

There ARE some legitimate positives to Wal-Mart. It's not a black and white
issue. But this website is pretty sycophantic with lines like this:

"Wal-Mart improves access to healthcare by raising the real incomes of all
the millions of people who are its customers or the customers of its
competitors, whose prices are lower because of its powerful competition.
This allows people to be able to afford healthcare more easily than they
otherwise could."

So I save a quarter on a gallon of milk compared to my union grocery store
that does play a livable wage and benefits to its employees. Those nominal
savings are supposed to somehow help me afford health insurance for my
family? Somebody hasn't priced insurance policies lately.


Jim Mitchell

12/31/2008 10:32:00 PM

0


<querosuave.beck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3efad781-bd8d-4a86-a259-44146dc91226@r24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 31, 1:09 pm, "Jim Mitchell" <jnjmitchREM...@swbell.net> wrote:

> And I still have a hard time buying the argument that he's somehow
> reaching
> a "different audience" this way- as if there's a true dichotomy between
> those who shop exclusively at Wal-Mart, and the rest of us music consumers
> in the US. Except in extremely rural communities, where is that a reality?
> Sure they're a huge retailer with the capability of giving a lot of
> publicity to an established singer with an otherwise niche audience.

>I think it's real. I lived in Martin, TN, population 10,000 or so,
>very rural vibe. Lots of peeps there only shop at Walmart, and that's
>where they buy virtually everything. There's a local indie record
>store, The Next Door (think black light posters, there's still a room
>of them in the back) that sells hip-hop, piercings, and Zeppelin cds
>and t-shirts, some alt-rock titles, etc. (I actually bought BitheUSA
>on vinyl there, day of release come to think of it.) But 98% of people
>in the area buy their cds at Wal-Mart. Garth Brooks, Kenny Chesney,
>Alabama, Clapton, Aerosmith, AC/DC, all sell like hotcakes. It's all
>very middle of the road --local radio stations playlists feel like a
>time machine, etc.-- and part of it is what's readily available and
>advertised at Wal-Mart. It's basically the only game in town to a lot
>of people, who simply don't shop, unless maybe it's 60 miles to
>Jackson for a new suit, or for a new car.

I'm sure there are some very rural communities where Wal-Mart is the main or
only retailer in town. But that still doesn't convince me that this is the
ONLY way that people there could have Bruce Springsteen marketed to them.
Don't they have internet access? Don't they see TV commercials or hear them
on the radio? Assuming it's so important for Bruce to reach this very
specific demographic, it seems to me that doing it through a Wal-Mart
exclusive is simply the most financially lucrative for him and/or his label.
I just can't see anything artistically altruistic about any of it.



Willy Eyenine

1/1/2009 7:04:00 PM

0


"Maureen" <foxy1vixen@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cb124770-36b1-456a-bbcb-2467b2c69209@q18g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...


:I'm wondering how long his Super Bowl appearance will be--usually,
they're not that long--and if he plans on singing a new song, then
what will we even hear of the so-called greatest hits? A medley?"
======================================

Prior to 2008's Super Bowl I was reading an interview w/Tom Petty.
He said that he and The HBs were being given twelve and a half minutes,
which, he added, presented some challenges. He did truncate some
of his songs during his 2008 half time show (for example, leaving out the
vampires verse in "Free Falling").

I don't see how this type of setting with this type of time restriction is
going to do anything to sway millions what all the fuss had been about
regarding Springsteen and his live shows. The thought of a medley and/or
shortened versions
turns my stomach...and, if no medley, then he'd have time for maybe three
songs.

The time constraints of a Super Bowl show probably worked best in the favor
for
someone such as Prince, who as a practice often presents his songs bunched
up as
a medley.