Asp Forum - win32console problem

Jake J.

5/11/2009 12:14:00 AM

I looked around and couldn't find a topic on this, but if I missed it,
please refer me to the topic location.

I am very new to ruby, so this is probably a simple question.

Here is my code:

<code>
begin
require 'rubygems'
rescue LoadError
end

require 'win32console'
require 'term/ansicolor'

include Win32::Console::ANSI

class String
include Term::ANSIColor
end

Win32Console.background_color :red
</code>

My the result I get is " uninitialized constant Win32Console
(NameError)". What am I doing wrong?

Thanks.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

7 Answers

Yisroel Markov

6/13/2014 1:22:00 PM

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:39:08 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
<fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> said:

>On 6/12/2014 10:36 AM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
>> <fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> said:
>>
>>> On 6/11/2014 9:40 AM, news wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> Here we have a large number of bleck ethnicities,
>>
>> Meant to ask for a while - why spell it "bleck"? Is it a South African
>> thing? :-)
>>
>>>> all belonging to
>>>> the same race. Assuming, of course, that you accept that humanity
>>>> is divided into Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid racial
>>>> classifications.
>>>
>>> Which is entirely a social construct, not based on what we'd nowadays
>>> call science.
>>
>> Maybe not. These groups of people developed in different regions,
>> under rather different conditions. Are you saying that evolution
>> stopped once humans left Africa? (If that's what they did; AFAIK
>> contrary evidence has been unearthed recently.)
>>
>
>No; there are trivial genomic differences between different ethnic
>groups.

How do you judge what's trivial? Racial differences are sometimes
described as "skin-deep." But the examples brought in the link you
snipped include malaria resistance in Africans and lactose tolerance
in Europeans; I would add alcohol resistance in certain northern
Europeans. These are gut-level differences :-)

>But Blumenbach's 18th century taxonomy of races, lovingly
>preserved by the United States Census and some other federal agencies,
>as well as by other use of the term "caucasian" to refer to people not
>from the Caucasus, is fundamentally a social construct. It does not
>reflect actual biology.

It does reflect differences visible to the naked eye, doesn't it? How
are these not biological, regardless of their significance or lack
thereof?
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

news

6/13/2014 1:31:00 PM

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:36:14 +0000 (UTC), Yisroel Markov
<ey.markov@MUNGiname.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
><fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> said:
>
>>On 6/11/2014 9:40 AM, news wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>>> Here we have a large number of bleck ethnicities,
>
>Meant to ask for a while - why spell it "bleck"? Is it a South African
>thing? :-)

It is. It's how the rest of the English speaking world thinks we
pronounce it. And most of us do!

--
Francis Xavier Turlough
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa

news

6/13/2014 1:32:00 PM

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:08:24 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
<hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>On 2014-06-11, news <news@fx27.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:56:55 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
>><fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>On 6/10/2014 12:49 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:28:22 +0000 (UTC), "news"
>>>> <news@fx05.iad.highwinds-media.com> said:
>
>>>> [snip]
>
>>>The Yoruba are a large ethnic group from what is now southern Nigeria.
>>>They roll up into the larger Bantu family, which dominates western and
>>>central sub-Saharan Africa. Ethiopians can be classified as Habesha, or
>>>(linguistically) as southern Semites, perhaps related to some of the
>>>other East African ethnicities, but totally distinct from the Yoruba and
>>>other Bantu.
>
>>>While Blumenbach arbitrarily decided, on the basis of his skull
>>>collection, that those were both "negroid" peoples, thus providing a
>>>pseudo-scientific basis for racism, even he admitted that dark skin was
>>>simply a characteristic of living in very sunny places, not the basis of
>>>his classification.
>
>> How would that explain the bleckness of those Africans living at high
>> altitudes in cool climates, e.g. Kenyans?
>
>It is not temperature, but sunlight, which is even higher in
>intensity at high altitudes.

But intense sunlight is not limited to Africa. The Andes have higher
altitudes than anywhere in Africa. With people living up there.

--
Francis Xavier Turlough
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa

mm

6/13/2014 5:58:00 PM

On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 06:22:01 +0000 (UTC), "Asher_N" <ashernat@gmail.com>
wrote:

>"news" <news@fx21.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote in
>news:0qfip9hql3ktn2h6h20cui642bp5kei1jo@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 02:55:40 +0000 (UTC), "Asher_N"
>> <ashernat@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"news" <news@fx27.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote in
>>>news:d3pfp9l3hqmsks430ei6qg16li05lsbs3j@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But there is such a thing as Jewish ethnicity, if only for Jews of
>>>> Middle Eastern origin. It's the ethnicity that gives the defining
>>>> facial characteristics often associated with Jews. Religion and
>>>> 'nationality' simply can't do that.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Francis Xavier Turlough
>>>> University of the Witwatersrand
>>>> Johannesburg
>>>> South Africa
>>>>
>>>
>>>OTOH, my wife, of Ashkenazic descent, is oftenn asked if she's Italian
>>>and I'm often told I look Jewish.
>>
>> Italian and Jewish are both 'Mediterranean' ethnicities. Perhaps you
>> look Jewish because you are Jewish (on at least one side of the
>> family, ethnically)?
>>
>
>She's of Polish descent. I have no Jewish ancestry on either side.
>
>
>>>Looks can be deceiving.
>>
>> Indeed. I've repeatedly said that it's not a science.

Has anyone ever said it was a science?

>> --
>> Francis Xavier Turlough
>> University of the Witwatersrand
>> Johannesburg
>> South Africa
>>

--

Meir
It is better to eat an onion in Jerusalem than a cockerel in Egypt. 1055CE

Herman Rubin

6/13/2014 7:39:00 PM

On 2014-06-13, news <news@fx24.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:08:24 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
><hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>>On 2014-06-11, news <news@fx27.iad.highwinds-media.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:56:55 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
>>><fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> wrote:

>>>>On 6/10/2014 12:49 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 13:28:22 +0000 (UTC), "news"
>>>>> <news@fx05.iad.highwinds-media.com> said:

>>>>> [snip]

>>>>The Yoruba are a large ethnic group from what is now southern Nigeria.
>>>>They roll up into the larger Bantu family, which dominates western and
>>>>central sub-Saharan Africa. Ethiopians can be classified as Habesha, or
>>>>(linguistically) as southern Semites, perhaps related to some of the
>>>>other East African ethnicities, but totally distinct from the Yoruba and
>>>>other Bantu.

>>>>While Blumenbach arbitrarily decided, on the basis of his skull
>>>>collection, that those were both "negroid" peoples, thus providing a
>>>>pseudo-scientific basis for racism, even he admitted that dark skin was
>>>>simply a characteristic of living in very sunny places, not the basis of
>>>>his classification.

>>> How would that explain the bleckness of those Africans living at high
>>> altitudes in cool climates, e.g. Kenyans?

>>It is not temperature, but sunlight, which is even higher in
>>intensity at high altitudes.

> But intense sunlight is not limited to Africa. The Andes have higher
> altitudes than anywhere in Africa. With people living up there.

From the results on archaeology, mankind started out in Africa, and
was black. Those who migrated out of Africa, the last big migration
being probably about 50,000 years ago, lost the black coloration to
variable amounts, depending where they lived, and also there were
genetic variations. The Amerinds seem to have come over less than
15,000 years ago from people who had a moderate amount of melanin
in their skins. While some may have come over earlier, it seems
that the great majority of the ancestry of the Amerinds is due to
a migration from northeast Asia over a short periods about 14,000
years ago, and this is why they are relatively homogeneous.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Fred Goldstein

6/13/2014 9:16:00 PM

On 6/13/2014 9:21 AM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:39:08 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
> <fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> said:
>
>> On 6/12/2014 10:36 AM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 08:25:43 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
>>> <fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> said:
>>>
>>>> On 6/11/2014 9:40 AM, news wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>> Here we have a large number of bleck ethnicities,
>>>
>>> Meant to ask for a while - why spell it "bleck"? Is it a South African
>>> thing? :-)
>>>
>>>>> all belonging to
>>>>> the same race. Assuming, of course, that you accept that humanity
>>>>> is divided into Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid racial
>>>>> classifications.
>>>>
>>>> Which is entirely a social construct, not based on what we'd nowadays
>>>> call science.
>>>
>>> Maybe not. These groups of people developed in different regions,
>>> under rather different conditions. Are you saying that evolution
>>> stopped once humans left Africa? (If that's what they did; AFAIK
>>> contrary evidence has been unearthed recently.)
>>>
>>
>> No; there are trivial genomic differences between different ethnic
>> groups.
>
> How do you judge what's trivial? Racial differences are sometimes
> described as "skin-deep." But the examples brought in the link you
> snipped include malaria resistance in Africans and lactose tolerance
> in Europeans; I would add alcohol resistance in certain northern
> Europeans. These are gut-level differences :-)
>

They represent a tiny fraction of the genome. And they do not lump
together neatly per Blumenbach's classification.

>> But Blumenbach's 18th century taxonomy of races, lovingly
>> preserved by the United States Census and some other federal agencies,
>> as well as by other use of the term "caucasian" to refer to people not
>>from the Caucasus, is fundamentally a social construct. It does not
>> reflect actual biology.
>
> It does reflect differences visible to the naked eye, doesn't it? How
> are these not biological, regardless of their significance or lack
> thereof?

It primarily reflected one particular biological aspect, skull shape, in
the various skulls in his collection. Not terribly visible to the naked
eye (and thus more "scientific" than what others had been doing up to
then) but also quite arbitrary (since it was based on Blumenbach's fetish).

mm

6/13/2014 9:32:00 PM

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:39:26 +0000 (UTC), Fred Goldstein
<fg_es@ionaryQRM.invalid> wrote:

>On 6/12/2014 10:36 AM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>...
>>>
>>> I've heard the word 'tribe' used in conjunction with "who's a Jew",
>>> but I don't particularly care for it. It sounds like a loose
>>> collection of nomadic people.

Not to me. And the definitions I've read say nothing about loose or
nomadic. The Israelite tribes' 40 years wandering in the desert was
ordered by G-d and preceded 600 years of conitinuous residence in one
place
>>
>> [nod] I prefer the term "clan" in this context. Then, conversion can
>> be viewed as an adoption into the clan. And adoption is usually (but
>> not always) irreversible - once you're family, you're always family.

I don't dislike the use of clan, but the good things you say about it
can also apply to a tribe.

>In common usage, a clan is smaller than a tribe,

To me, too. The Hatfilelds and the McCoys are clans, and atthough a
clan can be a lot bigger than either of them were, I like tribe too.

> perhaps a subset
>thereof. So Jews are, in my mind, closer to being a tribe,

>and the term "MOT" is not purely jocular.

Yes. I was surprised when I noticed that.
--

Meir
It is better to eat an onion in Jerusalem than a cockerel in Egypt. 1055CE

comp.lang.ruby

win32console problem

Jake J.

Yisroel Markov

news

news

mm

Herman Rubin

Fred Goldstein

mm

x Login to ForumsZone