[EVALUATION] - E03c - The Ruby Object Model (Revised Documentation)

[Ilias Lazaridis]

[EVALUATION] - E03b - The Ruby Object Model
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/e9d841fedb35903f

-

The above thread has shown, that the existen documentation is false.

Within this page, you'll find a link to an UML diagramm

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/

-

Please review the diagramm.

If it's correct, please ensure that the existent documentation is corrected.

..

 

[lostboard2001]

Let it be noted that c.l.python has absolutely refused to respond to
your latest demand for filling in your template (1000s of page views, 1
bump, 0 responses):

http://groups-beta.google.com/group...cec57515249/ad0fac1509db3964#ad0fac1509db3964

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

[EVALUATION] - E03b - The Ruby Object Model
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/e9d841fedb35903f

-

The above thread has shown, that the existen documentation is
false.

Within this page, you'll find a link to an UML diagramm

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/

-

Please review the diagramm.

If it's correct, please ensure that the existent documentation is
corrected.

Let it be noted that c.l.python has absolutely refused to respond to
your latest demand for filling in your template

what has this to do with "false ruby language core documentation"?

additionally: possibly the python community is scared about a
transparent direct comparison with ruby and other languages.

(1000s of page views, 1 bump, 0 responses):

where do you get the information "1000s of page views"?

what do you mean by "bumbp"?

http://groups-beta.google.com/group...cec57515249/ad0fac1509db3964#ad0fac1509db3964

Anyone of the ruby community knows python?

please fill the python template, to showcase the differences.

-

and please don't forget to ensure the quality of the ruby documentation.

..

 

[Martin Ankerl]

what has this to do with "false ruby language core documentation"?

Why do you say that?

what do you mean by "bumbp"?

Maybe your plans have something to do with this.

Anyone of the ruby community knows python?

Are you sure that anyone of the ruby community knows python?

please fill the python template, to showcase the differences.

Is it because of your life that you are going through all this?

and please don't forget to ensure the quality of the ruby documentation.

I don't understand.

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

[EVALUATION] - E03b - The Ruby Object Model
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/e9d841fedb35903f

-

The above thread has shown, that the existen documentation is false.

Within this page, you'll find a link to an UML diagramm

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/

-

Please review the diagramm.

If it's correct, please ensure that the existent documentation is
corrected.

an example for wrong ruby documentation:

-

cmd:> ri Class


"Classes, modules, and objects are interrelated. In the diagram that
follows, the arrows represent inheritance, and the parentheses
meta-classes. All metaclasses are instances of the class `Class'."

+------------------+
| |
Object---->(Object) |
^ ^ ^ ^ |
| | | | |
| | +-----+ +---------+ |
| | | | |
| +-----------+ | |
| | | | |
+------+ | Module--->(Module) |
| | ^ ^ |
OtherClass-->(OtherClass) | | |
| | |
Class---->(Class) |
^ |
| |
+----------------+

..

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Martin Ankerl wrote:
[...] - (several babbling)

I don't understand.

no, you don't _want_ to understand.

cause you don't want to admit that the ruby documentation is false.

but anyhow - it's irrelevant.

One should call Mr. Matz to review this.

Most possibly he's the only one who knows.

..

 

[Nikolai Weibull]

Ilias Lazaridis, April 18:

One should call Mr. Matz to review this.

Most possibly he's the only one who knows.

It seems that you don't anyway,
nikolai

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Ilias Lazaridis, April 18:



It seems that you don't anyway,

I've invested some time (whilst ignoring finally the current
documentation) to create this UML diagramm:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png

I'm asking now for confirmation/feedback.

This is nothing special within serious software-development.

-

But as it looks, this community is incapable to do so (giving productive
feedback).

..

 

[gene.tani]

Ilias:

I've noted that there's been unflattering stuff being said both by you
and others. Whatever happens, I hope that nobody feels inhibited from
asking good ruby questions. That's the whole point of the list. I
think there's still no ruby-tutor, and ruby-forum.org is still down, so
ask away.

That being said, I doubt that anybody's going to spend hours filling
inyour ruby and python templates. That's your job. And maybe it's
time to read the Pickax carefully and start digging for yourself.

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Ilias:

I've noted that there's been unflattering stuff being said both by you
and others. Whatever happens, I hope that nobody feels inhibited from
asking good ruby questions. That's the whole point of the list. I
think there's still no ruby-tutor, and ruby-forum.org is still down, so
ask away.

That being said, I doubt that anybody's going to spend hours filling
inyour ruby and python templates. That's your job.

Please let the people decide.

Many simply provide this information.

and btw: this thread here has nothing to do with the templates.

And maybe it's
time to read the Pickax carefully and start digging for yourself.

Maybe it's time that you realize, that the ruby documentation is false:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png

I will not continue to read _any_ ruby documentation, until this issue
here is clarified.

..

 

[Lionel Thiry]

Ilias Lazaridis a écrit :

I've invested some time (whilst ignoring finally the current
documentation) to create this UML diagramm:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png

I'm asking now for confirmation/feedback.

This is nothing special within serious software-development.

-

But as it looks, this community is incapable to do so (giving productive
feedback).

I can.

-

But there are other ways of asking, you know...

-

I'll give it a try: the documentation "ri Class" gives is not wrong at all.
Maybe not complete, but not wrong.

-

In "ri Class" text, if you replace references to "metaclasses" (which are said
to be between parentheses) by "singleton method placeholders", perhaps it
becomes clearer?

-

I remember that what was disturbing you was the stuff about metaclasses. I told
you ruby invite you to think more in terms of singleton method than in terms of
metaclasses. But it seems that you ignore what are singleton methods.

-

Have you ever evaluated some classless OO langages? I know some: IO (
http://www.iolanguage.com/ ), Self ( http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SelfLanguage ) and
REBOL (rebol is not basically OO, but its OO part is classless.
http://www.rebol.com/ ). If you would, the concept of singleton method would be
far easier to understand for you. (this is actually how I understood that concept)

-

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby/TheRubyObjectModel.png

Your UML diagram of ruby object model is hard to read, and probably wrong. The
separation between classes in memory and in source code is totally confusing. In
ruby, classes *are* objects. Learn more about classless languages, and it should
be far easier to understand these concepts.

There is another evident mistake in your UML diagram. Object doesn't inherit
from nil, nil is a literal and an instance of NilClass which inherit from Object.

-

I tried my best, I can't say anymore. Please, don't ask me for lengthy
exhausting explanations. Try the languages I told you about, they are really
worth it.

-

Have a nice day.

 

[Henrik Horneber]

Ilias Lazaridis a écrit :

I can't help it, this sounds too much like http://bash.org/?152037 to
not make me laugh.

PS: Please, anybody, do not blame me for anwsering this post. Do not
blame me for imitating Lazaridis posting. Do not blame me for trying to
be nice.

I, for one, appreciate your effort very much, (even though I fear it's
wasted).

Henrik

 

[tsuraan]

I can't help it, this sounds too much like http://bash.org/?152037 to
not make me laugh.

Scary... Before I even clicked the link, I was sure of which one you
were referring to.

 

[Carlos]

an example for wrong ruby documentation:

-

cmd:> ri Class


"Classes, modules, and objects are interrelated. In the diagram that
follows, the arrows represent inheritance, and the parentheses
meta-classes. All metaclasses are instances of the class `Class'."

Well, yes. If I'm not mistaken, horizontal arrows represent "instance
of". Only vertical ones represent inheritance.

 

[Florian Groß]

and btw: this thread here has nothing to do with the templates.

Maybe it's time that you realize, that starting a thread doesn't mean
owning it.

 

[Martin Ankerl]

I don't understand.

no, you don't _want_ to understand.

Uh, I thought it was obvious that my response was automatically
generated by a bot (emacs' psycodoctor).

martinus

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Maybe it's time that you realize, that starting a thread doesn't mean
owning it.

please let's not go into discussion essential usenet rules (or
mailinglist/forum rules).

It's a matter of gentleness against readers to stay in-topic, especially
within analytical threads.

..

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Uh, I thought it was obvious that my response was automatically
generated by a bot (emacs' psycodoctor).

I see.

Possibly the same bot has generated the the "ri class" documentation.

..

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Well, yes. If I'm not mistaken, horizontal arrows represent "instance
of".

not exactly, it's more a "becomes" relation:

"class definition" ----"becomes"----> "(class) instance"

-

"instance of" would be false, because:

* the direction fo the arrow would be wrong
* all 'metaclasses' are instances of the class "Class"

Only vertical ones represent inheritance.

yes.

so, the minimum correction would be:

additional text:
"the vertical arrows represent XXXX"

..

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

I do not see what's wrong here, can you explain?

definitive errors:

a) not all arrows represent inheritance, just the verticals.

b) the relation "(Object)"---[inherits from]--->"Class" is false.

correct: "(Object)"---[inherits-from]------->nil

or

correct: "(Object)"---[is-an-instance-of]--->Class

-

and finally:

the diagramm gives the impression, that "Object" and "(Object)" (etc.)
are both classes, which is of course false. There is a "definition" and
an "(instance)".

-

I will shortly update the UML diagramm to version 1.1, to simplify it a
little bit more:

http://lazaridis.com/case/lang/ruby

..