More "Enterprise Scale" talk over here, with a strong leaning towards
heavyweight tooling.
http://www.branhamgroup.com/article.php?cat=general&id=38
I wonder how a Ruby-based (ROR? Other?) approach would stack up, which bits
it would handle well and where it would fall short.
Hi,
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
But maybe in the future.
Obviously, that's very much opinion only. I think there has been a lot of evidence on this mailing list this past year that might bring that opinion into question.
James Edward Gray II
On Sep 29, 2005, at 6:21 PM, bonefry wrote:
Hi,
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
How about:
-some way to configure mod-ruby so you don't have to restart Apache every
time you change a class.
-having script behavior parity between mod-ruby and the command-line Ruby
1.8.2. (load and require behavior, and access to warnings like those you get
with the w option)
mod-ruby needs TLC.
On 9/29/05 6:21 PM, "bonefry" <bellarchitects@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
But maybe in the future.
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
But maybe in the future.
So far I've not been bitten by ruby being too slow, and the good IDE is nonsense. Ruby is fairly easy to program with a text editor (vi/emacs/notepad etc). Similar to the person banging on about not having a debugger - so? I've been programming "enterprise" or rather server side Java code for 6 years and I've *never* opened a debugger. Debuggers are not as helpful as a well written unit test (Using TestUnit for ruby, JUnit for Java etc).
The first mistake new-comers to eclipse make is to open the debug perspective and to step through code - a complete waste of time instead of writing a unit test.
If you come from an environment where using a debugger in your IDE is common (corporate practice, VisualStudio seems to encourage it's use - VisualStudio does have a great debugger etc), then you may believe that without a good debugger and IDE ruby is not ready for the enterprise, but in my opinion debuggers are vastly overated, and only with bad specs (in Java land) do you really need an IDE (JSF sucks without tool support for example).
I'm also not exactly sure what enterprise means in this context - I think the most important parts missing from ruby right now are related to libraries (for messaging, ESB etc) rather than super IDE/dev tool support.
Kev
important things missing from Ruby right now: a
fast VM and a good IDE.
The Zeus for Windows IDE can handle Ruby:
Zeus IDE - Programming environment for Windows developers
It offers features like syntax highlighting, code folding,
class browsing, macro scripting, intergrated version control,
smart indenting, project/workspace management etc etc.
Note: Zeus is shareware (45 day trial).
Jussi Jumppanen
Author: Zeus for Windows
ArachnoRuby works fine as a Ruby "IDE". There isn't really an IDE for Rails
per se, but how hard can it be to edit code in ArachnoRuby (or SciTE, or
UltraEdit or even Notepad), keep 2 DOS windows open (one to do "scaffold
generate ...", and the other to start and stop webbrick), and a web browser
window to hit the web pages? At least for development, there is generally
not much need to restart webbrick.
On 9/29/05, bonefry <bellarchitects@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
But maybe in the future.
I'm new to the Ruby world, but I've done a couple/three Apache modules over the past 18 - 24 months. What's the mod_ruby status? I noticed that the mod_ruby website lists the last release back in September of 2004. The Trac site gives me an error.
-Jeff
On Sep 29, 2005, at 7:43 PM, Pascal Meunier wrote:
How about:
-some way to configure mod-ruby so you don't have to restart Apache every
time you change a class.-having script behavior parity between mod-ruby and the command-line Ruby
1.8.2. (load and require behavior, and access to warnings like those you get
with the w option)mod-ruby needs TLC.
On 9/29/05 6:21 PM, "bonefry" <bellarchitects@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
Scale" applications.
But maybe in the future.
> Hi,
>
> there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM
> and
> a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
> Scale" applications.Obviously, that's very much opinion only. I think there has been a
lot of evidence on this mailing list this past year that might bring
that opinion into question.
Hi, I'm writing enterprise software that will be used simultaneously by web
users and CSRs using a client server scheme in Ruby. I beg to differ. 
(just figured I'd pipe up) It's definitely fast enough for the job (the main
latency is waiting for IO, not the processing time) and great at the task.
On Thursday 29 September 2005 17:26, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Sep 29, 2005, at 6:21 PM, bonefry wrote:
James Edward Gray II
i've been using SciTE for a while now, and i like it, just one things
bothers me:
/#{variable}/ is seen as a comment instead of a regular expression..
and just for that, i'd switch editors. oh yeah, and it's printing doesn't
really look very good.
greetings, Dirk.
2005/9/30, Corey Lawson <corey.ssf.lawson@gmail.com>:
ArachnoRuby works fine as a Ruby "IDE". There isn't really an IDE for
Rails
per se, but how hard can it be to edit code in ArachnoRuby (or SciTE, or
UltraEdit or even Notepad), keep 2 DOS windows open (one to do "scaffold
generate ...", and the other to start and stop webbrick), and a web
browser
window to hit the web pages? At least for development, there is generally
not much need to restart webbrick.On 9/29/05, bonefry <bellarchitects@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM and
> a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
> Scale" applications.
> But maybe in the future.
>
>
>
Kev Jackson wrote:
So far I've not been bitten by ruby being too slow, and the good IDE is
nonsense. Ruby is fairly easy to program with a text editor
(vi/emacs/notepad etc). Similar to the person banging on about not
having a debugger - so? I've been programming "enterprise" or rather
server side Java code for 6 years and I've *never* opened a debugger.
Debuggers are not as helpful as a well written unit test (Using TestUnit
for ruby, JUnit for Java etc).
Debugers are indeed overrated, but that doesn't mean they aren't
usefull. How can a unit test show you why the exit point of your
recursive function is not reached for example ?
Emacs/VI are good but they have an almoust vertical learning curve.
Notepad, I don't think so. And I really miss features of Eclipse like a
good file browser, jumping to the class/method declaration, a class
hierarchy viewer, code checking while typing, and all those refactoring
and code generation tools. And code auto-completion could be made to
work where it's possible. Of course, Emacs can be programmed to do all
sorts of things, but I ain't going to learn elips just for that. The
jEdit plugin also has very good functionality right now but it's far
from finished. Anyway, my point was no one can be efficient with
Notepad, and Emacs/VI basic functionality.
Kev Jackson wrote:
I'm also not exactly sure what enterprise means in this context - I
think the most important parts missing from ruby right now are related
to libraries (for messaging, ESB etc) rather than super IDE/dev tool
support.
Unfortunatelly, without a faster VM, we won't have those libraries too
soon. Because if they are done in pure Ruby they might get too slow,
and if they are done in C, the programmers working on them have to be
proeficient with 2 languages. Before having all kinds of usefull
libraries, in my oppinion, the VM's speed should increase.
I have read comments on this mail list saying that speed can be
optimized. Well, sometimes it cannot be optimized. Not all O(n)
alghoritms can be optimized to O(1) and not all O(n*n) alghrithms can
be optimized to O(n). And AI for example ussually requires backtracking
and thats a O(2^n). And Ruby currently chokes on O(n).
-some way to configure mod-ruby so you don't have to restart Apache every
time you change a class.
This is already possible in environments like Rails where the
framework classes are cached, but your classes are reloaded (in
development mode).
I think this in general is one of the hallmarks of Ruby and something
I continuously stress when talking about Ruby on Rails: Change Is
Instant.
--
David Heinemeier Hansson
http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain
http://www.basecamphq.com -- Online project management
http://www.backpackit.com -- Personal information manager
http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework
Corey Lawson wrote:
There isn't really an IDE for Rails
per se
No, but I've been having a lot of fun with the closest you can get -- the text editor in the 15 min. video that was co-developed by DHH, TextMate, is really cool. File browser drawer, snippets (actually done in a useful way, thanks to the tabs thing), auto-complete (to some extent), etc. all incredibly customizable.
Devin
>there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a
>fast VM and a good IDE. Until you have those you really
>cannot do "Enterprise Scale" applications.
+1
Obviously, that's very much opinion only. I think there has
been a lot of evidence on this mailing list this past year
that might bring that opinion into question.
We've talked with a friend of mine who's in mobile services
business. They're migrating from Perl to Java as a base
development platform exactly for "mainstream" reasons;
and he's not just a decent manager, he's seasoned developer
himself.
Ruby wasn't an option due to exactly performance reasons.
Even if people who code well could be found or trained by those
who already do a bit (like me). Even if he saw me developing
.rb's much cleaner and smaller than what he could do in Perl
and PHP back then when we worked together.
*Evidence* on *mailing lists* isn't really anything.
Talks don't weigh a lot and opinions are rarely paid for.
I do know about Rite plans a bit, so please don't jump up
explaining me that next version does I happen to enjoy Ruby
since 1.6 but also happen to know when it begins to crawl on me.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:26:14AM +0900, James Edward Gray II wrote:
--
---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <mike@altlinux.ru>
------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/
There are step-by-step instructions on how to setup Arachno Ruby for Rails.
See the Rails wiki and search on Arachno.
Mike Pence
On 9/30/05, Dirk Meijer <hawkman.gelooft@gmail.com> wrote:
i've been using SciTE for a while now, and i like it, just one things
bothers me:
/#{variable}/ is seen as a comment instead of a regular expression..
and just for that, i'd switch editors. oh yeah, and it's printing doesn't
really look very good.
greetings, Dirk.2005/9/30, Corey Lawson <corey.ssf.lawson@gmail.com>:
>
> ArachnoRuby works fine as a Ruby "IDE". There isn't really an IDE for
> Rails
> per se, but how hard can it be to edit code in ArachnoRuby (or SciTE, or
> UltraEdit or even Notepad), keep 2 DOS windows open (one to do "scaffold
> generate ...", and the other to start and stop webbrick), and a web
> browser
> window to hit the web pages? At least for development, there is
generally
> not much need to restart webbrick.
>
>
>
> On 9/29/05, bonefry <bellarchitects@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > there are 2 important things missing from Ruby right now: a fast VM
and
> > a good IDE. Until you have those you really cannot do "Enterprise
> > Scale" applications.
> > But maybe in the future.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Hello.
bonefry:
Emacs/VI are good but they have an almoust vertical learning curve.
:o) The worst thing is I can't easily use Gedit/Notepad/Word after
using vim for everything (like writing this email) on a daily basis.
And I really miss features of Eclipse like a good
file browser, jumping to the class/method declaration,
FWIW, I learned yesterday about ctags[1], which seem to work quite
good for me (if I can judge them after just two days' use with a PHP
project).
a class hierarchy viewer, code checking while typing, and all those
refactoring and code generation tools. And code auto-completion could
be made to work where it's possible.
I'm totally *not* writing from experience here, but I believe file
browser, class hierarchy viewer and code auto-completion are also
doable with vim and its plugins.
[1] http://ctags.sourceforge.net/, Debian/Ubuntu package exuberant-ctags
Cheers,
-- Shot
--
When C++ is your hammer, everything looks like a thumb. -- Steven M. Haflich
====================== home.pl: Nr 1 w Polsce. Domeny, Hosting, Serwery WWW, Strony, eSklep, Office 365 === home.pl: Nr 1 w Polsce. Domeny, Hosting, Serwery WWW, Strony, eSklep, Office 365 ===
So how do I get that to happen in mod-ruby without using RoR? Your comment
is tantalizing but leaves me hanging there...
Thanks,
Pascal
On 9/30/05 6:22 AM, "David Heinemeier Hansson" <david.heinemeier@gmail.com> wrote:
-some way to configure mod-ruby so you don't have to restart Apache every
time you change a class.This is already possible in environments like Rails where the
framework classes are cached, but your classes are reloaded (in
development mode).I think this in general is one of the hallmarks of Ruby and something
I continuously stress when talking about Ruby on Rails: Change Is
Instant.
--
David Heinemeier Hansson
http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain
http://www.basecamphq.com -- Online project management
http://www.backpackit.com -- Personal information manager
http://www.rubyonrails.com -- Web-application framework
I thought TextMate was for Mac. Is there a version for Linux ?
I agree. That editor has won me over.
Getting back to the original claim, it does have Rails specific syntax highlighting baked right it.
James Edward Gray II
On Sep 30, 2005, at 7:14 AM, Devin Mullins wrote:
Corey Lawson wrote:
There isn't really an IDE for Rails
per seNo, but I've been having a lot of fun with the closest you can get -- the text editor in the 15 min. video that was co-developed by DHH, TextMate, is really cool. File browser drawer, snippets (actually done in a useful way, thanks to the tabs thing), auto-complete (to some extent), etc. all incredibly customizable.
bonefry you sure throw a lot of opinion around, but you always forget to qualify it as such. 
Debugers are indeed overrated, but that doesn't mean they aren't
usefull. How can a unit test show you why the exit point of your
recursive function is not reached for example ?
No problem here, since Ruby ships with a debugger.
Emacs/VI are good but they have an almoust vertical learning curve.
Notepad, I don't think so. And I really miss features of Eclipse like a
good file browser, jumping to the class/method declaration, a class
hierarchy viewer, code checking while typing, and all those refactoring
and code generation tools.
You list four text editors/IDEs here, so I hardly think that's representative. I can name at least twice as many more that I know are Ruby aware.
And doesn't Eclipse have a Ruby plug-in?
Unfortunatelly, without a faster VM, we won't have those libraries too
soon. Because if they are done in pure Ruby they might get too slow,
You are totally using guesswork here and it's poorly researched guess work at that.
and if they are done in C, the programmers working on them have to be
proeficient with 2 languages. Before having all kinds of usefull
libraries, in my oppinion, the VM's speed should increase.
Many people know C, so there's not much of a leap here. The entire Core Ruby team, just to name one example, fits your profile perfectly.
And Ruby currently chokes on O(n).
Oh please! That's not even intelligent enough to provoke a comment. Now you are simply ignoring reality.
James Edward Gray II
On Sep 30, 2005, at 5:06 AM, bonefry wrote: