Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.ruby > #4803

Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation.

Path csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!talisker.lacave.net!lacave.net!not-for-mail
From Brian Candler <b.candler@pobox.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.ruby
Subject Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation.
Date Fri, 20 May 2011 03:25:45 -0500
Organization Service de news de lacave.net
Lines 22
Message-ID <89280a1ffc0d0e79f6d550c5a42fac25@ruby-forum.com> (permalink)
References <iqqupr$i2j$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host bristol.highgroove.com
Content-Type text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace talisker.lacave.net 1305879972 38054 65.111.164.187 (20 May 2011 08:26:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To abuse@lacave.net
NNTP-Posting-Date Fri, 20 May 2011 08:26:12 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To <iqqupr$i2j$1@dont-email.me>
X-Received-From This message has been automatically forwarded from the ruby-talk mailing list by a gateway at comp.lang.ruby. If it is SPAM, it did not originate at comp.lang.ruby. Please report the original sender, and not us. Thanks! For more details about this gateway, please visit: http://blog.grayproductions.net/categories/the_gateway
X-Mail-Count 383508
X-Ml-Name ruby-talk
X-Rubymirror Yes
X-Ruby-Talk <89280a1ffc0d0e79f6d550c5a42fac25@ruby-forum.com>
Xref x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.ruby:4803

Show key headers only | View raw

unknown wrote in post #998975:
> I started investigating ruby.
> It's very informal, which is NOT suitable for computing.

In that case I think you'll enjoy trying to understand the semantics of 
String in ruby 1.9 (not):
https://github.com/candlerb/string19/raw/master/string19.rb

Anyway, there was an attempt to produce a formal spec for ruby, which 
may be what you're looking for, although it seems to have gone quiet:
http://ruby-std.netlab.jp/

It was based on ruby 1.8.7.

Otherwise, I guess ruby is not the language for you. For those who need 
to write programs using formal methods or safety-critical systems I'd 
say it's definitely not. But many of us use it because ruby helps us 
write useful applications quickly and enjoyably.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Back to comp.lang.ruby | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. no.top.post@gmail.com - 2011-05-16 10:37 +0000
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Adam Prescott <adam@aprescott.com> - 2011-05-16 06:15 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Peter Hickman <peterhickman386@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-16 06:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-16 06:52 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Clifford Heath <no@spam.please.net> - 2011-05-17 09:17 +1000
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> - 2011-05-16 19:50 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Stu <stu@rubyprogrammer.net> - 2011-05-17 02:41 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-18 20:35 +0200
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 05:07 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Stu <stu@rubyprogrammer.net> - 2011-05-16 18:30 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. William Rutiser <wruyahoo05@comcast.net> - 2011-05-16 19:21 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Justin Collins <justincollins@ucla.edu> - 2011-05-17 04:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. "Markus H." <shevegen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-19 12:57 -0500
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Kevin <darkintent@gmail.com> - 2011-05-19 13:42 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Brian Candler <b.candler@pobox.com> - 2011-05-20 03:25 -0500
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Josh Cheek <josh.cheek@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 07:34 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. spiralofhope <spiralofhope_rubyml@lavabit.com> - 2011-05-20 13:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 08:12 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 08:12 -0500

csiph-web