search for: fetishist

...er to to/ are chosen at random, it seems, altough there are several patterns to be seen: -) all of the a_*.php files are omitted -) all but one of the *.inc files are omitted -) the .cvsignore in projects/ is omitted, but not the one in from/ Any ideas? greetings!hop -- pathological-techno-fetishist-with-social-deficit

...arguing that "<someclass>" %in% class(.) > uses usual syntax, and thus looks less intimidating than > inherit() and less cryptic than is() I think you should all use -- and *teach* -- inherits(.) more often, and it would no longer be intimidating. Also, for the speed fetishists: inherits() will typically be slightly (but significantly) faster than ` %in% class(.) ` Martin

...est (looks cute). But trying to make the case for "<someclass>" %in% class(x) on Twitter??! %-/ </ranting mode> H. > > I think you should all use -- and *teach* -- > inherits(.) more often, and it would no longer be intimidating. > > Also, for the speed fetishists: inherits() will typically be > slightly (but significantly) faster than ` %in% class(.) ` > > Martin > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__stat.ethz.ch_mailman_list...

> On Nov 10, 2019, at 3:36 AM, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > >>>>>> Gabriel Becker >>>>>> on Sat, 2 Nov 2019 12:37:08 -0700 writes: > >> I agree that we can be careful and narrow and still see a >> nice improvement in behavior. While Herve's point is valid >> and I understand his frustration,

...han anything else, as it seems to be mostly benign. I'd appreciate it if nobody would bug me about this any further, please. You know where to get samples, and after reading this mail you know as much the worm as I do. -Ben -- Ben Cantrick, mackys@ronin.net "Pathological techno-fetishist with social deficit" at large. Net.ronin, philosoph and garbageman.

Frankly I''m losing tolerance for the MS "stack." And I''m intrigued by Rails. But in my outfit I''m not only the web person, but also the application person and the DBA. So when I read that Rails doesn''t want to handle things like "compound keys" I blew right by those claims, thinking, "no way." But before I go deeper, I

I constantly get told I should just create a DSL in Ruby, instead of having a separate, custom language. This has, unsurprisingly, come up multiple times here at OSCON. So, I decided I''d see if I could hack something up and see how it looked. This is the first thing I could come up with in terms of the basic functionality: #!/usr/bin/ruby class Base file "/etc/passwd",