Ryan King wrote: > On May 19, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Tim Fletcher wrote: >>> Note: while there is some obvious benefits to keeping the high level >>> design of the two implementations in sync, I have no interest in >>> drawing >>> attention to language differences. If there are obvious Ruby idioms >>> that can make a given section of code smaller or clearer, then by all >>> means, such idioms should be used. >> Yes, there are parts that could be made more Rubyish. > > In terms of making things more rubyish, I have a rubyforge that I > setup for this [1].
[1] http://rubyforge.org/projects/html5/ That would be cool! - Sam Ruby --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "html5lib-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to html5lib-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/html5lib-discuss?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4