Yesterday, ActiveState released Komodo
3.5.1<http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/>,
an IDE for dynamic languages. This version fully supports Ruby on all
platforms (the previous version was not available on Windows). I just
blogged about it here:
http://blog.curthibbs.us/articles/2005/12/01/activestate-releases-ruby-ide
Curt
I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
Komodo User's Guide says:
Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
a standalone ruby program.
Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Thats just the way it works. It takes forever between page loads because it has to load the rails framework, your rails app and webrick all into the debugger so its just slow. The whole debugger is pure ruby so the results you are getting are to be expected. They are talking about rewriting the debugger in C to increase the speed though.
Cheers-
-Ezra Zygmuntowicz
Yakima Herald-Republic
WebMaster
509-577-7732
ezra@yakima-herald.com
On Dec 2, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Christer Nilsson wrote:
I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?Komodo User's Guide says:
Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
a standalone ruby program.Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
Christer
--
I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
Yes, I noticed this, too... running programs in debug mode is slow (slower
than the debugger in ArachnoRuby or Eclipse/RDT). I'm not sure why, though.
Komodo User's Guide says:
Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
a standalone ruby program.Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
I haven't tried this, I wouldn't expect it to be any faster.
Curt
On 12/2/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrister.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Christer,
I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
I'd give ArachnoRuby a try: http://www.ruby-ide.com
(there's a 30 day free trial version.)
It's by far the fastest Ruby debugger I've seen. I've used it to do
Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
I thought Komodo used to support code completion drop-downs... is this
not the case anymore? Or only in PHP and not Ruby?
I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's debugger
(all the other stuff is about the same speed).
Curt
On 12/5/05, Wayne Vucenic <nightphotos@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Christer,
> I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?I'd give ArachnoRuby a try: http://www.ruby-ide.com
(there's a 30 day free trial version.)It's by far the fastest Ruby debugger I've seen. I've used it to do
Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
It does this in Ruby, too. But only if it knows what the type/class of a
variable is. So if I have
test = Array.new
temp = "test string"
You'll get the code assist on these two variables. But if all you have is:
def my_method(value)
end
You won't get code assist on "value".
Curt
On 12/2/05, frugalprogrammer <sillydeveloper@gmail.com> wrote:
I thought Komodo used to support code completion drop-downs... is this
not the case anymore? Or only in PHP and not Ruby?
curt.hibbs wrote:
Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's
debugger
(all the other stuff is about the same speed).Curt
I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !
Debugging with ArachnoRuby seems to be about 50% slower than direct
execution, which is completely acceptable.
Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby. Their web page wasn't
very convincing, but the numbers above are.
Christer
On 12/5/05, Wayne Vucenic <nightphotos@gmail.com> wrote:
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
Radrails is quite good, but still lacks the debugger. And it's really
random trying to start the server.
Is it really necessary for Komodo to try to debug ALL of the librarys ?
Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Thanks for the numbers. I had not actually timed it, but I knew there was a
speed difference.
Curt
On 12/6/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrister.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:
curt.hibbs wrote:
> On 12/5/05, Wayne Vucenic <nightphotos@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
> I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's
> debugger
> (all the other stuff is about the same speed).
>
> CurtI compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !Debugging with ArachnoRuby seems to be about 50% slower than direct
execution, which is completely acceptable.Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby. Their web page wasn't
very convincing, but the numbers above are.Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Hi Christer,
I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby.
You're very welcome!
Their web page wasn't very convincing, but the numbers above are.
I believe ArachnoRuby development is currently focused on enhancing
the product rather than doing PR/Website stuff. So the product is
excellent, but the website doesn't fully convey that.
I think I've tried every Ruby IDE available on Windows (including some
lesser known ones like Mondrian), and ArachnoRuby is what I've chosen
to use.
I earn (part of) my living programming in Ruby, and I simply wouldn't
be able to do much of this work without ArachnoRuby. Sometimes in my
work I have a Ruby script that takes an hour to run, which gets some
weird error near the end of the run. Before ArachnoRuby I simply
couldn't debug these scripts, as in the other debuggers it would have
taken days to get to the point of reproducing the error. So there
were many projects I couldn't even attempt in Ruby, because I knew
that if I had a problem I might not be able to effectively debug it.
I've been using ArachroRuby for well over a year. Sometimes I use it
8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week. It's never let me down. It is still
in beta, so there are occasional glitches, but they're pretty minor.
It used to crash at times (that's become pretty infrequent lately),
but when this happened I'd just restart it. It would automatically
re-open the files I'd had open, and I'd pick up where I left off. I
only lost code I'd typed once or twice, and this was never more than a
line or so. Not a big deal.
Two of the features I like a lot are the Ruby Gems browser (Tools
menu, then "Ruby Gems Browser...") which makes RubyGems so much easier
to work with than the usual command line tools,
and the Ruby Class browser (Tools menu, then "Ruby Class
Browser..."). Currently the class browser only works with the classes
in Ruby and in the standard library, but in the future you'll be able
to add your own classes to it.
(I have no financial or other connection with ArachnoRuby, except as a
_very_ satisfied user and beta tester.)
Wayne
On 12/6/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrister.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
And I sure wish some of these projects would pick up on the Agile / XP thing of
releasing solid code every week. It's not really that hard to do ...
It does look interesting, thanks for the folks who posted about it.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
Komodo, ArachnoRuby, Eclipse/RDT, FreeRIDE. There's probably more, but these
are the ones I know about.
Curt
Radrails is quite good, but still lacks the debugger. And it's really
On 12/2/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrister.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:
random trying to start the server.
Is it really necessary for Komodo to try to debug ALL of the librarys ?
Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
I will second the recommendation. I really like ArachnoRuby and have
it open about 8 hours of everyday now. Lothar (the author) has been
very responsive when I needed/desired a feature. As has been stated
there are a few glitches here and there, but all and all it is the
best tool I have found as well.
Patrick
Hi, did you try the Ruby editor RDE?
What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
bad...
Most important thing is that it's free!!!
Hank
On 12/7/05, Wayne Vucenic <nightphotos@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Christer,
On 12/6/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrister.nilsson@gmail.com> wrote:
> I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
> ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !
>
> Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby.You're very welcome!
>Their web page wasn't very convincing, but the numbers above are.
I believe ArachnoRuby development is currently focused on enhancing
the product rather than doing PR/Website stuff. So the product is
excellent, but the website doesn't fully convey that.I think I've tried every Ruby IDE available on Windows (including some
lesser known ones like Mondrian), and ArachnoRuby is what I've chosen
to use.I earn (part of) my living programming in Ruby, and I simply wouldn't
be able to do much of this work without ArachnoRuby. Sometimes in my
work I have a Ruby script that takes an hour to run, which gets some
weird error near the end of the run. Before ArachnoRuby I simply
couldn't debug these scripts, as in the other debuggers it would have
taken days to get to the point of reproducing the error. So there
were many projects I couldn't even attempt in Ruby, because I knew
that if I had a problem I might not be able to effectively debug it.I've been using ArachroRuby for well over a year. Sometimes I use it
8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week. It's never let me down. It is still
in beta, so there are occasional glitches, but they're pretty minor.
It used to crash at times (that's become pretty infrequent lately),
but when this happened I'd just restart it. It would automatically
re-open the files I'd had open, and I'd pick up where I left off. I
only lost code I'd typed once or twice, and this was never more than a
line or so. Not a big deal.Two of the features I like a lot are the Ruby Gems browser (Tools
menu, then "Ruby Gems Browser...") which makes RubyGems so much easier
to work with than the usual command line tools,and the Ruby Class browser (Tools menu, then "Ruby Class
Browser..."). Currently the class browser only works with the classes
in Ruby and in the standard library, but in the future you'll be able
to add your own classes to it.(I have no financial or other connection with ArachnoRuby, except as a
_very_ satisfied user and beta tester.)Wayne
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
As a total noobie, I am still unfamiliar with Ruby syntax. ArachnoRuby
tells you if the line is syntactically malformed (sometimes too
eagerly!) and you fix the line before compilingt Saves time. At this
point, this is ArachnoRuby's selling point for me. When it reaches 1.0,
and I'm convinced Ruby is my next programming language (and it looks
like that is becoming a certainty -- the user group is outstandingly
helpful and very knowledgeable!), I'll get me a registered copy.
basi
Wayne!
I agree with your comment on Arachno. It's amazing that one person,
Lothar, can achieve so much.
Could you please explain slimeline and debugger quick mode ?
Have you tried Arachno in a Rails project ?
Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Perhaps a waste of time to some people, but documentation comes very good to
new people who want to program ruby. I think Lothar has forgotten what its
like to be a new programmer.
Tsume
On Sunday 11 December 2005 11:02 am, Ron Jeffries wrote:
Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
Hi Hank,
Hi, did you try the Ruby editor RDE?
What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
bad...
Yes, I used RDE for a year or more before ArachnoRuby was available.
It was OK for its time, but the debugger was just soooo slooooow. It
was RDE that I was using when in my earlier post I mentioned there
were projects that I just couldn't do in Ruby because I wouldn't be
able to debug them.
When ArachnoRuby came out I switched from RDE and I've never regretted it.
Wayne
On 12/6/05, Hank Gong <hankgong@gmail.com> wrote:
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"