Damon wrote:
Don’t forget us Mac heads!
- Create Mac OS X dmg file,
or better yet,
- Create fink package (and submit it to fink).
You forgot:
5.5. Get FXRuby working on Mac OS X.
Lyle:
I am keeping roo awake for you. If you need help,
just email.
Jim
OK…so FreeRIDE is written purely in Ruby…there is NO ‘C’ code. Not
one line. But we do depend on native Ruby extensions including FXRuby
(with FXScintilla) and Ripper (source parser). Ripper is a quick
recompile, but FXRuby and FXScintilla (thus Fox and Scintilla) is
another matter. If these run on your platform and work with Ruby,
FreeRIDE should work there. If not, it won’t.
-rich
···
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Hodel [mailto:drbrain@segment7.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:27 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: RubyConf 2002 Slides for FreeRIDE PresentationDamon (adamon@mailandnews.com) wrote:
From the Wiki:
Deployment
- Create Linux RPMs
- Create Debian packages
- Create tarballs
- Write installation instructions
- Create windows installer
Don’t forget us Mac heads!
- Create Mac OS X dmg file,
or better yet,
- Create fink package (and submit it to fink).
What? No FreeBSD port?
From: Gavin Sinclair [mailto:gsinclair@soyabean.com.au]
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 6:12 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: RubyConf 2002 Slides for FreeRIDE PresentationFrom: “Robert McGovern” tarasis@btopenworld.com
One feature I heard about in Intellij that sounds quite
“neat” is that
it grays out unused variables & import statments.Oooooooh, there’s a LOT more than that: all sorts of
completion, method lists, code templates, type error alerts,
refactoring, JUnit/Ant/CVS integration…It is one of the most impressive pieces of software I have
ever seen. However, I have to say that Ruby doesn’t need
half the features IntelliJ provides because it is so
lightweight (yet durable). Basically, Java requires an
intelligent IDE to make it usable. Ruby has most of this
usability out of the box.
I must say Idea (Intellij) IS the best thing since sliced bread for
Java. After a year of NOT doing Java devt (after 6 full-time Java
years) I had to go back to it. If it wasn’t for Idea, I don’t think I
would have survived. Its quite amazing what one can do with a
statically typed language. Which brings me to what Gavin said. Ruby is
quite usable and lots of the crap that Java forces you to do manually,
Ruby does for you. But without static typing we may be somewhat
limited…time will tell. What I am most interested in in the IDE is
distributed collaboration (or more like distributed project management)
using things like jabber and REAL transparency with dealing with version
control is another thing.
I’m sure we’ll see some very clever features plugged in to
FreeRIDE, though. Even more if the interpreter can be made to
generate useful information to reveal program structure, etc.Gavin
We will have something that gives you an AST that any plugin can access.
We already do through a library named Ripper, but its in the midst of a
refactor/rebuild. This is an area that will be facinating to see what
folks come up with. The nice thing about FreeRIDE will be the ease of
writing new plugins/functions in Ruby. Hope that once we get it out and
rolling we get large community involvement.
···
-----Original Message-----
ma to mark the start of a block, then d’a to delete all the lines
between the start and the cursor. or d`a to delete all the characters
between the start and the cursor.
Quit and don’t save is :q!
Paul
···
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 08:07:44AM +0900, Rudolf Polzer wrote:
Scripsit ille JamesBritt james@jamesbritt.com:
c) Emacs…well if you are an Emacs user there will never be anything
better, but for the rest of humanity…there is FreeRIDEI was going to mention vi, but then decided against it.
Forget vi, you cannot even select text using it (you have to press
at the start and the beginning of a block to get the line numbers which
you have to type in for the command). Also, vi doesn’t have ZQ for “quit
and don’t save”, as well as no syntax-highlighting.
A FreeBSD ‘port’ is a generic term for an installable ‘package’.
(Actually, in FreeBSD-speak, packages are ports that have been compiled
and saved into a tar’d and bzip’d archive for people who don’t like to
bulid from source.)
A port consists of a Makefile that describes dependency, configure
options, etc. So its really simple to make.
More info here:
(actually, you can probably bug seanc to make the port for you, since
he’s a ports commiter)
···
Rich Kilmer (rich@infoether.com) wrote:
What? No FreeBSD port?
OK…so FreeRIDE is written purely in Ruby…there is NO ‘C’ code. Not
one line. But we do depend on native Ruby extensions including FXRuby
(with FXScintilla) and Ripper (source parser). Ripper is a quick
recompile, but FXRuby and FXScintilla (thus Fox and Scintilla) is
another matter. If these run on your platform and work with Ruby,
FreeRIDE should work there. If not, it won’t.
–
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
All messages signed with fingerprint:
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
Rich Kilmer wrote:
OK…so FreeRIDE is written purely in Ruby…there is NO ‘C’ code. Not
one line. But we do depend on native Ruby extensions including FXRuby
(with FXScintilla) and Ripper (source parser). Ripper is a quick
recompile, but FXRuby and FXScintilla (thus Fox and Scintilla) is
another matter. If these run on your platform and work with Ruby,
FreeRIDE should work there. If not, it won’t.
I think it’s pretty safe to say that FOX, FXRuby and FXScintilla will
work fine under FreeBSD (although I can’t say whether they’re in the
FreeBSD ports or not).
Jim Freeze wrote:
I am keeping roo awake for you. If you need help,
just email.
Yes, I should note that while we don’t have FXRuby working under Mac OSX
yet, that Jim is generously allowing me to log in to his iBook
remotely to work on this. FOX (the C++ library) already runs under
XFree86 on Mac OSX and now it’s just a matter of determining the right
incantations to make FXRuby work as well 
Rich Kilmer wrote:
I must say Idea (Intellij) IS the best thing since sliced bread for
Java. After a year of NOT doing Java devt (after 6 full-time Java
years) I had to go back to it. If it wasn’t for Idea, I don’t think I
would have survived. Its quite amazing what one can do with a
statically typed language. Which brings me to what Gavin said. Ruby is
quite usable and lots of the crap that Java forces you to do manually,
Ruby does for you. But without static typing we may be somewhat
limited…time will tell. What I am most interested in in the IDE is
distributed collaboration (or more like distributed project management)
using things like jabber and REAL transparency with dealing with version
control is another thing.
I had just started using IntelliJ IDEA for my Java development when I
discovered Ruby. It was the thought of having to giveup all those nice
features that inspired me to (along with Rich) start the FreeRIDE project!
Curt
Scripsit ille Paul Brannan pbrannan@atdesk.com:
Scripsit ille JamesBritt james@jamesbritt.com:
c) Emacs…well if you are an Emacs user there will never be anything
better, but for the rest of humanity…there is FreeRIDEI was going to mention vi, but then decided against it.
Forget vi, you cannot even select text using it (you have to press
at the start and the beginning of a block to get the line numbers which
you have to type in for the command). Also, vi doesn’t have ZQ for “quit
and don’t save”, as well as no syntax-highlighting.ma to mark the start of a block, then d’a to delete all the lines
between the start and the cursor. or d`a to delete all the characters
between the start and the cursor.
Thanks! I’ll try to get used to this.
Quit and don’t save is :q!
Which is three keypresses more than ZQ:
ZQ = Shift-Z-Q
:q! = Shift-.-q-Shift-1-Return
Same with US key bindings. But this isn’t really an argument since it
can be 'map’ped away.
···
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 08:07:44AM +0900, Rudolf Polzer wrote:
–
[mpg123d] Just playing: …/albums/vintage/s/11 Lively Motion.mp3
AH! I didn’t mean to get THAT up, you pervert!!!
S. Asuka Langley
“Rich Kilmer” rich@infoether.com wrote in message news:<002501c28eb5$45644860$>
I must say Idea (Intellij) IS the best thing since sliced bread for
Java. After a year of NOT doing Java devt (after 6 full-time Java
years) I had to go back to it. If it wasn’t for Idea, I don’t think I
would have survived. Its quite amazing what one can do with a
statically typed language. Which brings me to what Gavin said. Ruby is
quite usable and lots of the crap that Java forces you to do manually,
Ruby does for you. But without static typing we may be somewhat
limited…time will tell
Can you expound on this a little? What are the major benefits of
static-typing? I’ve programmed in statically-typed languages for a
long time, and felt liberated when I switched to Ruby and Smalltalk.
There have been long debates about this issue before, with advocates
of dynamically-typed languages claiming that static-typing (in
imperative programming, not in functional languages) is oversold, and
that the benefits of compile-time type hecking are outweighed by the
limitations of code-factoring and the bother of having to write
boilerplate code in order to appease the type-checker. I’m interested
in this alternate perspective, especially in regard to Java.
Thanks,
Damon
There are ports of Fox and FXRuby (the port is called ruby-fox). No
FXScintilla. Unfortunately the ports are not current (Fox 1.0.11, FXRuby
1.03) and FreeRIDE installation will likely need fresh source compilation
(or maybe an e-mail or two to the port maintainer).
BTW: What is the expected date of 0.5.0 release shipping. I can hardly wait
And one more question: will the 1.7.x version of Ruby be required for
FreeRIDE to run?
Dalibor Sramek
···
On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 12:43:13AM +0900, Lyle Johnson wrote:
Rich Kilmer wrote:
I think it’s pretty safe to say that FOX, FXRuby and FXScintilla will
work fine under FreeBSD (although I can’t say whether they’re in the
FreeBSD ports or not).
–
Dalibor Sramek “In the eyes of cats, all things belong to cats.”
dali@insula.cz
Lyle Johnson wrote:
Jim Freeze wrote:
I am keeping roo awake for you. If you need help,
just email.Yes, I should note that while we don’t have FXRuby working under Mac OSX
yet, that Jim is generously allowing me to log in to his iBook
remotely to work on this. FOX (the C++ library) already runs under
XFree86 on Mac OSX and now it’s just a matter of determining the right
incantations to make FXRuby work as well
Does that include FXScintilla on the Mac, too?
Curt
I must say Idea (Intellij) IS the best thing since sliced bread for
Java. After a year of NOT doing Java devt (after 6 full-time Java
years) I had to go back to it. If it wasn’t for Idea, I don’t think I
would have survived. Its quite amazing what one can do with a
statically typed language. Which brings me to what Gavin said. Ruby is
quite usable and lots of the crap that Java forces you to do manually,
Ruby does for you. But without static typing we may be somewhat
limited…time will tellCan you expound on this a little? What are the major benefits of
static-typing? I’ve programmed in statically-typed languages for a
long time, and felt liberated when I switched to Ruby and Smalltalk.
There have been long debates about this issue before, with advocates
of dynamically-typed languages claiming that static-typing (in
imperative programming, not in functional languages) is oversold, and
that the benefits of compile-time type hecking are outweighed by the
limitations of code-factoring and the bother of having to write
boilerplate code in order to appease the type-checker. I’m interested
in this alternate perspective, especially in regard to Java.Thanks,
Damon
Out of context error. Your understanding will shut down 
Rich was extolling the virtues of static typing from an IDE writer’s point of
view, not a general programmer’s.
The static-typing IDE in question, IntelliJ IDEA, would not conceivably be
anywhere near as powerful if Java was dynamically typed. Countering this,
however, is the efficiency of Ruby coding as opposed to Java, so a massive IDE
is not needed.
There’s hope, though. The Smalltalk Refactoring Browser has a good reputation,
so it must be possible to mix advanced IDEs and dynamic languages somehow.
Gavin
Dalibor Sramek wrote:
Rich Kilmer wrote:
I think it’s pretty safe to say that FOX, FXRuby and FXScintilla will
work fine under FreeBSD (although I can’t say whether they’re in the
FreeBSD ports or not).There are ports of Fox and FXRuby (the port is called ruby-fox). No
FXScintilla. Unfortunately the ports are not current (Fox 1.0.11, FXRuby
1.03) and FreeRIDE installation will likely need fresh source compilation
(or maybe an e-mail or two to the port maintainer).
FXScintilla is embedded in FXRuby, but the version you have listed above is
a little old. The port should probably be updated.
BTW: What is the expected date of 0.5.0 release shipping. I can
hardly wait
As I said a couple days ago, we are very, very close. I put together a final
“ToDo List” for the FreeRIDE release. You can see it here:
http://www.rubyide.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Release_0.5.0_Tasks
And one more question: will the 1.7.x version of Ruby be required for
FreeRIDE to run?
Yes.
Curt
···
On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 12:43:13AM +0900, Lyle Johnson wrote:
The goal is to do enough to get FreeRIDE running on Mac OS X
with XFree86. Concerning FXScintilla, does that require
scintilla or SciTE (or both) to be installed?
···
On Saturday, 16 November 2002 at 17:17:43 +0900, Curt Hibbs wrote:
Lyle Johnson wrote:
Jim Freeze wrote:
I am keeping roo awake for you. If you need help,
just email.Yes, I should note that while we don’t have FXRuby working under Mac OSX
yet, that Jim is generously allowing me to log in to his iBook
remotely to work on this. FOX (the C++ library) already runs under
XFree86 on Mac OSX and now it’s just a matter of determining the right
incantations to make FXRuby work as wellDoes that include FXScintilla on the Mac, too?
–
Jim Freeze
What this country needs is a good five cent ANYTHING!
I wonder if one could take advantage of Unit tests to provide some runtime
information about what references correspond to what classes. If your
coverage is fairly complete it may be possible to get a pretty good idea
about what types things end up as - at least sufficient enough the tests.
Which would be good enough for me.
-Tom
···
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
From: “Damon” adamon@mailandnews.com
“Rich Kilmer” rich@infoether.com wrote
I must say Idea (Intellij) IS the best thing since sliced bread for
Java. After a year of NOT doing Java devt (after 6 full-time Java
years) I had to go back to it. If it wasn’t for Idea, I don’t think I
would have survived. Its quite amazing what one can do with a
statically typed language. Which brings me to what Gavin said. Ruby is
quite usable and lots of the crap that Java forces you to do manually,
Ruby does for you. But without static typing we may be somewhat
limited…time will tellCan you expound on this a little? What are the major benefits of
static-typing? I’ve programmed in statically-typed languages for a
long time, and felt liberated when I switched to Ruby and Smalltalk.
There have been long debates about this issue before, with advocates
of dynamically-typed languages claiming that static-typing (in
imperative programming, not in functional languages) is oversold, and
that the benefits of compile-time type hecking are outweighed by the
limitations of code-factoring and the bother of having to write
boilerplate code in order to appease the type-checker. I’m interested
in this alternate perspective, especially in regard to Java.Thanks,
Damon
Out of context error. Your understanding will shut down
Rich was extolling the virtues of static typing from an IDE writer’s point of
view, not a general programmer’s.The static-typing IDE in question, IntelliJ IDEA, would not conceivably be
anywhere near as powerful if Java was dynamically typed. Countering this,
however, is the efficiency of Ruby coding as opposed to Java, so a massive IDE
is not needed.There’s hope, though. The Smalltalk Refactoring Browser has a good reputation,
so it must be possible to mix advanced IDEs and dynamic languages somehow.Gavin
Jim Freeze wrote:
Lyle Johnson wrote:
Jim Freeze wrote:
I am keeping roo awake for you. If you need help,
just email.Yes, I should note that while we don’t have FXRuby working
under Mac OSX
yet, that Jim is generously allowing me to log in to his iBook
remotely to work on this. FOX (the C++ library) already runs under
XFree86 on Mac OSX and now it’s just a matter of determining the right
incantations to make FXRuby work as wellDoes that include FXScintilla on the Mac, too?
The goal is to do enough to get FreeRIDE running on Mac OS X
with XFree86. Concerning FXScintilla, does that require
scintilla or SciTE (or both) to be installed?
Neither. FXScintilla is s port of the Scintilla widget to use Fox to render
its GUI. Lyle includes FXScintilla in FXRuby. The FXScinitilla project,
itself, can be found at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/fxscintilla/
Curt
···
On Saturday, 16 November 2002 at 17:17:43 +0900, Curt Hibbs wrote:
Jim Freeze wrote:
The goal is to do enough to get FreeRIDE running on Mac OS X
with XFree86. Concerning FXScintilla, does that require
scintilla or SciTE (or both) to be installed?
The FXScintilla tarball (available from its home site on
savannah.gnu.org) contains the Scintilla “core”; in other words,
FXScintilla only depends on FOX. And then FXRuby depends on both of those.
tom wrote:
I wonder if one could take advantage of Unit tests to provide some runtime
information about what references correspond to what classes. If your
coverage is fairly complete it may be possible to get a pretty good idea
about what types things end up as - at least sufficient enough the tests.
Which would be good enough for me.
This information can also be used to improve the speed of method lookup.
There is a lot written about this, from research in the Self programming
language. They implemented a very quick just-in-time compiler based on
this.
/Anders
···
–
A n d e r s B e n g t s s o n | ndrsbngtssn@yahoo.se
Stockholm, Sweden |
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!
Curt Hibbs wrote:
Neither. FXScintilla is s port of the Scintilla widget to use Fox to render
its GUI. Lyle includes FXScintilla in FXRuby.
No – the FXRuby sources don’t include the source code for the
FXScintilla widget. If you’re building everything from source (as we’re
trying to do on Mac OSX) you’d need all three pieces:
FOX (the main C++ library)
FXScintilla (a third-party widget for FOX, also C++)
FXRuby (the glue code that wraps FOX and, optionally, FXScintilla)
I have spoiled the Windows users by compiling all of this stuff and
putting it in the Windows installer for FXRuby But I think
precompiled binaries are available from other sources for other
platforms (i.e. different Linuxes and FreeBSD). Your best bet is to ask
around on the foxgui-users mailing list to see which, if any, such
packages are available.