[Ironruby-core] What's next?

Shay Friedman shay.friedman at gmail.com
Fri Jun 4 03:08:13 EDT 2010


I'm using RubyMine for rails and projects with more than 2-3 files.
Otherwise I'm using SciTE.

By the way, RubyMine is not free.

Shay.
--------------------------------------------------------
Shay Friedman | Microsoft Visual C#/IronRuby MVP | Author of IronRuby
Unleashed | Sela Technology Center
Blog: http://IronShay.com | Twitter: http://twitter.com/ironshay


On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Stuart Ellis <stuart at stuartellis.eu> wrote:

> Interesting - I tried SharpDevelop and Netbeans, and wasn't happy with them
> for different reasons, but not RubyMine.
>
> Thanks
>
> On 3 Jun 2010, at 21:49, Martin Smith wrote:
>
> > Hey Stuart,
> >
> > Try out rubymine. We use that and it works pretty well even with
> IronRuby...
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Stuart Ellis <stuart at stuartellis.eu>
> wrote:
> >>> From the peanut gallery: the lack of VS integration has definitely held
> me back from trying to push IronRuby in any capacity at work - I've been
> happy using Ruby without an IDE, but I am fairly certain that my colleagues
> would politely and firmly decline any suggestion of switching to text editor
> and the CLI. You could take that as a complement to the work of the VS team
> :)
> >>
> >> On 25 May 2010, at 12:15, Mark Rendle wrote:
> >>
> >>> In terms of MRI compatibility, I'd suggest that 1.9.2 would be a good
> target. 1.9.1 has various issues and has been largely ignored in favour of
> 1.8.7, but I'm seeing a lot of people recommending 1.9.2 even in its current
> pre state.
> >>>
> >>> Beyond compatibility, I think VS integration would be sweet, and would
> help drive adoption among my vi-illiterate colleagues.
> >>>
> >>> If my sum workload ever drops below critical mass, I'll start to
> contribute: honest!
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Jimmy Schementi <
> Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:
> >>> Will, what you are describing is the preferred way of packaging Ruby
> code as an exe. Someone should write a sample that shows how to do this; I
> believe there already is one but I don't have the URL handy.
> >>>
> >>> David, the first part of your email sounded reasonable, but the 2nd
> part (about scope) came from left field. Please indicate why the recipe
> Tomas and Will explained make IronRuby any less than first-class (whatever
> that means =P). IronPython is also planning on doing this too, so we think
> it's the best "self-contained deployment" option, but I'd like to hear why
> it won't work for you.
> >>>
> >>> As far as the other discussed features go, let me draw a line in the
> sand for the next major release (let's call it vNext for argument's sake):
> >>>
> >>> 1.) It is a goal of IronRuby vNext to improve interop with .NETs type
> system, so we will most likely implement something like IronPython's
> "clrtype" feature, and provide a library which lets you emit real static
> types from Ruby code. You could even imagine taking the emitted IL and
> writing it to a DLL, which could be called directly from a static language,
> but that's lower priority.
> >>>
> >>> 2.) It is not a goal of IronRuby vNext to implement a static compiler
> for Ruby; as in we will not emit both similar types and method bodies as C#.
> IronRuby is a dynamic language, and any static compiler features should be
> part of a .NET backend for Duby (currently only a JVM backend exists).
> Pre-compilation is different; it involves emitting IL to a DLL that we would
> have emit at runtime, given every method were called. This would only help
> startup marginally, as we already have fast startup with the interpreter and
> NGEN-ing IronRuby's binaries, and most of the time spent is actually running
> code, not emitting it. Also, pre-compilation doesn't help us CLR type system
> interop, as it would not produce a CLI-compliant assembly; assemblies
> generated by pyc cannot be referenced by a C# app.
> >>>
> >>> As far as non-.NET related features, we'll be targeting Ruby 1.9
> support, and running Rails 3 and other libs will focus us on what features
> to implement first (so 1.8.7 compat might happen despite us wanting to move
> directly to 1.9). FFI is another possible feature, but only if there are
> crucial libs that use it, or if someone contributes it.
> >>>
> >>> Any other features people are curious about? Now is definitely the time
> to voice your opinions :)
> >>>
> >>> ~Jimmy
> >>>
> >>> On May 11, 2010, at 7:15 PM, "Will Green" <will at hotgazpacho.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Why not create an executable assembly that embeds all the Ruby files
> as resources in the assembly? Extract them at runtime (you could probably
> just keep them in a memory stream), fire up a Ruby runtime host & engine,
> feed it the Ruby file, and away you go.
> >>>>
> >>>> Or am I missing something that would make this infeasible?
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Will Green
> >>>> http://hotgazpacho.org/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:20 PM, David Escobar <davidescobar at ieee.org>
> wrote:
> >>>> Ok, that's certainly an option to look into. I guess what people want
> is the ability to distribute applications and libraries in .exe and .dll
> form, the same way we do with C# or VB. But perhaps it's a question of scope
> - maybe IronRuby is not intended to be a 1st class .NET language in the same
> way that C# or VB are, or it's only intended to be a language for embedding
> in a static language or for unit testing purposes?
> >>>>
> >>>> The other reason is that it provides some (small) level of code
> obfuscation. I realize of course that the assemblies can be reverse
> engineered, but most users won't bother to do that - they'll just be
> interested in running the .exe.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Tomas Matousek <
> Tomas.Matousek at microsoft.com> wrote:
> >>>> Well, there is a pretty simple way how to package up .rb files into an
> .exe file w/o precompiling anything. One option is to build a
> self-extracting zip file or something like that. That would solve the
> deployment issue. Improving startup time via pre-compilation is much more
> work.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Tomas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:
> ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of David Escobar
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 5:48 PM
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] What's next?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Pre-compiling code would allow us to distribute our programs in .exe
> and .dll form, rather than .rb files. IronPython allows this with its pyc.py
> script. And if that means faster startup times and using Ruby code
> statically from C#, then all the better.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Tomas Matousek <
> Tomas.Matousek at microsoft.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> What would you like to achieve by pre-compiling code? Faster startup
> time? Packaging your code in a dll instead of a bunch of .rb files? Using
> Ruby code statically from C#?
> >>>>
> >>>> Tomas
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:
> ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Martin Smith
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 11:14 AM
> >>>> To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> Subject: [Ironruby-core] What's next?
> >>>>
> >>>> Hey Guys,
> >>>>
> >>>> Now that IronRuby 1.0 has shipped (congrats!!), what's next on the
> docket? :) I'm not trying to pressure you guys! Just excited about the
> future.
> >>>> The feature i'd love to see most would be pre-compilation...
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for such a great product,
> >>>> Martin
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >>> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Stuart Ellis
> >> stuart at stuartellis.eu
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ironruby-core mailing list
> >> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ironruby-core mailing list
> > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
> ---
> Stuart Ellis
> stuart at stuartellis.eu
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100604/68f1ba15/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Ironruby-core mailing list