What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?
Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.
tia
Im working on an editor-widget (has a Ruby-backend)… Its in an early state
and I expect it take some months before its really usable.
A screenshot of the Ncurses-frontend:
homepage:
http://metaeditor.sf.net/
Current unittest-status:
Time: 0.849822
FAILURES!!!
Test Results:
Run: 191/191(581 asserts) Failures: 6 Errors: 0
Im working on a QT-frontend. But I have some serious segfaults because I
embed Ruby into C++… useless backtraces (garbage)!
I hope to get better control of Ruby-Embedded-into-C++.
A frontend for windows is planned, but this is way far out in the future.
···
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:33:44 +0000, you CAN teach an old dog … wrote:
Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.
–
Simon Strandgaard
you CAN teach an old dog … wrote:
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?
I use jEdit myself. I also run Ultra-Edit sometimes, but jEdit has some things (folding, mainly) that Ultra-Edit lacks. Only complaint is that jEdit is sluggish (being Java) at points, but on the whole works quite well.
I’d add “practical ruby” to rde/rubywin, though it’s not on RAA, try
googleing
···
il 17 Jun 2003 09:33:44 -0700, itsme213@hotmail.com (you CAN teach an old dog …) ha scritto::
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.tia
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?
I am happy with vim and I guess there’s a version for Windows too.
You’ll need some time to really appreciate it, though (I am only now
beginning to really get into it after using it for 3 years 
)
···
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 01:45:11AM +0900, you CAN teach an old dog … wrote:
Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.
–
_ _
__ __ | | ___ _ __ ___ __ _ _ __
'_ \ /| __/ __| '__ \ / ` | ’ \
) | (| | |__ \ | | | | | (| | | | |
.__/ _,|_|/| || ||_,|| |_|
Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com
We apologize for the inconvenience, but we’d still like yout to test out
this kernel.
– Linus Torvalds, announcing another kernel patch
“you CAN teach an old dog …” itsme213@hotmail.com wrote in message
news:a6e48b6b.0306170833.6305cd38@posting.google.com…
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?
The Scite editor comes with the Ruby installation and I quite like it. It
also supports F5 for running scripts - I don’t recall if it highligts error
messages from Ruby in script, but it does with C-compiler messages.
Generally I also use Scite over MS Developer Studio when I don’t need to
debug C and C++ programs because it is small and fast. I don’t like the
default font so I have configured it to courier fixed with fonts. IMHO that
makes it a lot more usable.
If you want some project management there is the Filex application (Windows
only) that works tightly with scite. www.scintilla.org
Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.
FreeRIDE also uses the Scintilla editor controlled used by the Scite editor.
I too found the current FreeRIDE too unstable on Windows - I’m anxiously
awaiting a more stable release with debugging support. Longer term I think
FreeRIDE could be great IDE also for other languages.
Mikkel
you CAN teach an old dog … wrote:
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.tia
Vim is great.
itsme213@hotmail.com (you CAN teach an old dog …) wrote in message news:a6e48b6b.0306170833.6305cd38@posting.google.com…
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?Is there anything really promising in the works and likely to be
usable in the next few months? I tried FreeRIDE but it’s currently too
unstable on Windows.tia
vim is about as serious as you could want (as an editor; as an IDE
it’s simple but efficient). It also has the considerable benefit that
it is exactly the same wherever you are, from windows XP workstation
to vt100 terminal – a skill that lasts for life.
Of course, you do have to learn the ‘vi way of thinking’. But it’s
well worth it.
[snip]
try the windows edition of emacs 
it works for me and is pretty cool
···
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 01:45:11 +0900 itsme213@hotmail.com (you CAN teach an old dog …) wrote:
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?
–
Regards,
Warren Brian Noronha.
warren@freedomink.org
http://warren.freedomink.org
Key fingerprint = 4B76 48B0 3612 986E 519A 1279 BDDA 9236 0139 471B
I use Ultra-Edit also, but I haven’t figured out how to use the debugger inside the environment or how to beautify the code.
you CAN teach an old dog … wrote:
What editor / ide would you recommend for serious Ruby work on
Windows?I use jEdit myself. I also run Ultra-Edit sometimes, but jEdit has some things (folding, mainly) that Ultra-Edit lacks. Only complaint is that jEdit is
sluggish (being Java) at points, but on the whole works quite well.
vim is about as serious as you could want (as an editor; as an IDE
it’s simple but efficient). It also has the considerable benefit that
it is exactly the same wherever you are, from windows XP workstation
to vt100 terminal – a skill that lasts for life.
How can for example the vi editor jump to the line where a ruby editor
occurred? Do I need special scripts for this or do I have to turn an option
on? I’m new to vi
Of course, you do have to learn the ‘vi way of thinking’. But it’s
well worth it.
Do you have some addresses to learn the vi way?
thanks!
Dominik
I use Emacs and Vim for most of my work. I’m very hopeful on FreeRide, but
the last time I tried it it still wasn’t that stable. (It has been a
while.) What would be really sweet is full refactoring Ruby support inside
Eclipse…
Joey
···
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 04:23:39 +0900, Warren Brian Noronha warren@freedomink.org wrote:
try the windows edition of emacs
–
Dean saor, dean saor an spiorad. Is seinn d’orain beo.
“Dominik Werder” dwerder@gmx.net schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:oprq0u40bnjh6mnk@mail.gmx.net…
Do you have some addresses to learn the vi way?
I found this quite comprehensive. But I guess google will give you a lot
online hits.
robert
Dominik Werder dwerder@gmx.net wrote in message news:oprq0u40bnjh6mnk@mail.gmx.net…
How can for example the vi editor jump to the line where a ruby editor
occurred? Do I need special scripts for this or do I have to turn an option
on? I’m new to vi
In plain vi, this is not easy, but in vim (the most commonly
recommended vi-like editor) there is what’s known as the ‘quick fix’
buffer. In practise, this means you run ruby, the errors show up in a
‘quick fix’ window, and you click on a line in the ‘quick fix’ window
to jump to the appropriate source line. Vim should magically
understand the command to run ruby and the format of error messages,
because it will load this information based on the type of file you
are editing.
Of course, since it is vim, there are many useful commands to navigate
through the error list…
Of course, you do have to learn the ‘vi way of thinking’. But it’s
well worth it.
Do you have some addresses to learn the vi way?
Well, http://www.vim.org/doc.php is the standard place, as someone
said. But this article:
is a good, enthusiastic introduction to vi and vim from an outsider’s
point of view, and it explains a bit about why people like it.
hth
Benjamin Peterson
http://www.jbrowse.com
What would be really sweet is full refactoring Ruby support inside Eclipse...
Which is by definition impossible for Ruby, Python, PHP, Perl and
other languages. All you can get are refactoring suggestions, most of
them not more comfortable then a good grep result.
Hi,
Do you have some addresses to learn the vi way?
[…]
Before you invest in a book, if you take a look at
http://www.vim.org/docs.php
you will find loads of good documentation. They even put the whole vim
book online and you can download the short reference as pdf to print it
out. The website also features a very good FAQ. I learned most of my
humble vi knowledge from these pages.
Guido
What would be really sweet is full refactoring Ruby support inside
Eclipse…Which is by definition impossible for Ruby, Python, PHP, Perl and
other languages. All you can get are refactoring suggestions, most of
them not more comfortable then a good grep result.
Really? Why do you say that? I find it interesting that the first
language for which refactoring was implemented was Smalltalk, which one
could argue is MORE dynamic than any of the languages you mention. So it
seems that a refactoring engine is quite plausible for Ruby (and other
languages like it).
That said, it’s certainly not a trivial thing to implement… otherwise
we’d probably already have one :-).
Nathaniel
<:((><
nathaniel@NOSPAMtalbott.ws wrote:
Which is by definition impossible for Ruby, Python, PHP, Perl and
other languages. All you can get are refactoring suggestions, most of
them not more comfortable then a good grep result.Really? Why do you say that? I find it interesting that the first
language for which refactoring was implemented was Smalltalk, which one
could argue is MORE dynamic than any of the languages you mention. So it
seems that a refactoring engine is quite plausible for Ruby (and other
languages like it).
The dynamic nature is only part of the equation. AFAIK, the syntax of
SmallTalk is a lot simpler (machine-wise atleast) than Ruby. The (lack
of) operator precedence in ST springs to mind. Predeclared variables in
ST is a big help also (regarding the “is this a local variable or a
method?” problem). And I don’t think ST has the mutable closure
possibilities we have with our blocks. (Pass a block to some method and
suddenly my locals have mutated? Good luck refactoring with that in
mind!)
I’d hazard to guess you’d need a full blown Ruby parser to do any safe
and useful refactoring.
Disclaimer: IMHO, YMMV, IANALL (IAmNotALanguageLawer) and IANAST
(IAmNotASmallTalker).
···
Lothar Scholz [mailto:mailinglists@scriptolutions.com] wrote:
–
([ Kent Dahl ]/)_ ~ [ Kent Dahl - Kent Dahl ]/~
))_student_/(( _d L b_/ (pre-) Master of Science in Technology )
( __õ|õ// ) )Industrial economics and technological management(
_/ö____/ (_engineering.discipline=Computer::Technology)
Really? Why do you say that? I find it interesting that the first
language for which refactoring was implemented was Smalltalk, which one
First there is a significant difference between Ruby and
Smalltalk/Lisp. The latter is an "image" language. You don't need
statistic code analyser to find the classes methods etc. You just use
introspection on the Class class. So some problems are eliminated.
Second, from what you write i think you have not seen the refactoring
browser of Smalltalk yet. It is also not more then a good context
sensitive grep. You can never be sure that a refactoring keeps integrity.
For the most useful refactorings it is very easy to create a 99,99% perfect
refactoring tool in Java and other statical typed languages. But also
impossible to do it Smalltalk. For example the often used "rename
method" refactoring does present you a list of results to which you
have to confirm that they are really right method calls. Some
dynamically dispatched methods are obmitted from this list.
Which is by definition impossible for Ruby, Python, PHP, Perl and
other languages. All you can get are refactoring suggestions, most of
them not more comfortable then a good grep result.Really? Why do you say that? I find it interesting that the first
language for which refactoring was implemented was Smalltalk, which one
could argue is MORE dynamic than any of the languages you mention. So it
seems that a refactoring engine is quite plausible for Ruby (and other
languages like it).The dynamic nature is only part of the equation. AFAIK, the syntax of
SmallTalk is a lot simpler (machine-wise atleast) than Ruby. The (lack
of) operator precedence in ST springs to mind. Predeclared variables in
ST is a big help also (regarding the “is this a local variable or a
method?” problem). And I don’t think ST has the mutable closure
possibilities we have with our blocks. (Pass a block to some method and
suddenly my locals have mutated? Good luck refactoring with that in
mind!)
Markus Denker held yesterday a talk at Euruko03 on Squeak’s
devel. environment (refactoring browser, etc). I asked him if all he was
showing to us depended on being image based, and his first answer was
that refactoring should be possible even if not. However, I met him on
the way home once Euruko03 was finished and after chatting for quite some
time it became clear that, even if we are not image based, we definitely
need to have a Ruby interpreter inside the editor, which has got to know
all of your code (+ libs). This would be slow (imagine parsing all your
code every time you change something), so you’d perhaps like to save
the AST plus state up to that point, but then you have an image
So it seems there’s definitely things Smalltalk does we won’t be able to
do for quite some time because of
- dynamic typing
- not being image based
I’d hazard to guess you’d need a full blown Ruby parser to do any safe
and useful refactoring.
In order to do the things we saw yesterday, a parser is not enough, you
need a full-blown interpreter.
···
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 12:58:13AM +0900, Kent Dahl wrote:
–
_ _
__ __ | | ___ _ __ ___ __ _ _ __
'_ \ /| __/ __| '__ \ / ` | ’ \
) | (| | |__ \ | | | | | (| | | | |
.__/ _,|_|/| || ||_,|| |_|
Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com
Never trust an operating system you don’t have sources for. 
– Unknown source