Re: String Handling in Ruby

2012-08-02 Thread Robert Klemme
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Tridib Bandopadhyay wrote: > Thanks Henry that was very much helpful. > > OK now I have my own extension which allocates object. It takes 48 > seconds to allocate 61 million number of strings in an array which my > extension creates whereas regular ruby takes 120 se

Re: Supporting multiple versions of an API

2012-08-02 Thread Robert Klemme
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Intransition wrote: > > > On Thursday, August 2, 2012 12:14:27 PM UTC-4, Robert Klemme wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Intransition wrote: >> >> > Yes, that's the traditional factory approach. I actually would not want >> > to >> > use "MainFactory",

Re: Supporting multiple versions of an API

2012-08-02 Thread Intransition
On Thursday, August 2, 2012 12:14:27 PM UTC-4, Robert Klemme wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Intransition wrote: > > > Yes, that's the traditional factory approach. I actually would not want > to > > use "MainFactory", as don't want it to be explicit. But it occurs to me > that >

Re: Supporting multiple versions of an API

2012-08-02 Thread Intransition
On Thursday, August 2, 2012 10:47:19 AM UTC-4, Intransition wrote: > > >> It splits things up into maintainable files quite nicely, and also has >> less parsing (for what that's worth.) However it wouldn't work if you >> need two different versions of Main in the one program. >> > > Yep. Exact

Re: working with large binary strings?

2012-08-02 Thread Robert Klemme
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 1:55 PM, bob hope wrote: > Hi, so in the spirit of not cluttering the forum I will ask my somewhat > unrelated but still related question here. So I have finished > implementing this, but have run into one issue, when I XOR strings > together like this: > > def xor_strings

Re: Supporting multiple versions of an API

2012-08-02 Thread Robert Klemme
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Intransition wrote: > Yes, that's the traditional factory approach. I actually would not want to > use "MainFactory", as don't want it to be explicit. But it occurs to me that > I could have redefined `Main.new` as a factory method and done it that way. > And the m

Re: Supporting multiple versions of an API

2012-08-02 Thread Intransition
On Monday, July 30, 2012 9:28:04 PM UTC-4, Matthew Kerwin wrote: > > > For what it's worth, I kind of like this solution, but I get the > feeling there's something not quite right about it. Same here, but it's probably just b/c its unusual --its not something you can really do in any other la