Thank you.
I will definitely look into Objective -C and RubyMotion metaprogramming and
reflection abilities.
David
On May 19, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Colin Thomas Arnold Gray wrote:
Just because RubyMotion is compiled doesn't mean it can't have
metaprogramming and reflection abilities. These
Francis,
I know nothing about RubyMotion but if I understand correctly it uses a
compiler and not an interpreter. So I doubt if it can implement Metaprogramming
and Reflection. If it does not , then it is not a Ruby . It might be an
excellent language but not Ruby.
To the best of my
Hey David,
Francis is right, MRI is leading the way, although there was an ISO standard
released last year.
The alternative implementations started the ruby specs, years before that so
they could get their rubies to work as drop in replacement for MRI.
There are other languages with variants
Hi Ben,
I am writing an OS X project that relies on Metaprogramming and Reflection.
Does not seem like RubMotion is an option for me.
All the best,
David
On May 16, 2013, at 10:05 PM, Carolyn Ann Grant wrote:
Thanks, Mark!
Yeah, I know the price is more than reasonable, Mark, it's just
@ben thanks, this is very clear
@david you can do reflection and metaprogramming in RubyMotion, but if you
porting code from regular ruby (like those use missing standard library like
singleton, delegate, or those missing API like eval string, method_define
string) , it might need some big
Just because RubyMotion is compiled doesn't mean it can't have metaprogramming
and reflection abilities. These features are not orthogonal to each other. It
is true that most compiled languages DON'T have these features, but objective-c
definitely DOES.
For some light reading, check out (if
Francis,
Ruby is very well defined language with a well defined standard.
David
On May 17, 2013, at 3:31 PM, Francis Chong wrote:
@david depends on your definition on full ruby. I would say standard library
is part is full ruby, where RubyMotion deliberately remove part of them
@stephen
David
Yes? I got an impression it's just matz implementation. BTW, do RubyMotion even
run ruby spec?
—
Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 5:04 AM, david kramf dakr@gmail.com wrote:
Francis,
Ruby is very well defined language with a well defined standard.
David
On May
While I'm really happy about OS X support on RubyMotion, it is not a
replacement for MacRuby.
IMHO MacRuby is far superior:
It offer JIT compiler, you develop orders of magnitude faster as you dont need
clean and rebuild every time.
You have full ruby compatibility, load standard library
Hi, I've got a question about the future of MacRuby. I like it, and have
started working on a project or two using it, but I've been reading about GC
and ARC, Ruby 2.0, RubyMotion and so on, and wonder where MacRuby is going? I'm
quite concerned because I've put a good amount of time into my
Hello all (and especially Carolyn),
I just want to say that I have the same question, specifically regarding the
GC/ARC issue.
The context in which this came up was very revealing. I had been developing a
fairly complex Cocoa project (ARC enabled) and decided that I had to add some
tests.
Using
Add me in as another questioner of MacRuby's future. (And thanks for bringing
this up -- I'd been meaning to do so myself.)
The GC issue is the most obvious, but I've also noticed a distinct lack of
updates and general involvement by any of the maintainers. Looking at the
already-sparse
Just wanted to add a ditto to this - I'm looking at migrating some old
AppleScript Studio projects to MacRuby - my initial testing about a year ago
was great, but it seems the stability of MacRuby as a development platform is
in question to me at least... I've already been abandoned by
They recently added support for OS X to rubymotion:
http://blog.rubymotion.com/post/49943751398/rubymotion-goes-2-0-and-gets-os-x-support-templates
That said, since rubymotion is (I believe) based off of macruby with some
additions specifically around static compilation of apps, I don't know if
I'm a longtime RubyMotion user, and MacRuby user before that. I want to share
my view as to what is the current status of MacRuby and what can happen in the
future.
The momentum around MacRuby has been inexistent for almost a year and a half.
That is, since Laurent Sansonetti (the original
I would like to see Laurent and Hipbyte offer a paid version of MacRuby with
the same pricing structure as RubyMotion. I'd buy it...
--
Shaun
On Thursday, 16 May, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Mark Villacampa wrote:
I'm a longtime RubyMotion user, and MacRuby user before that. I want to share
my
@Shaun: I think RubyMotion 2 is that offering.
@Mark: Well said. I dabbled in MacRuby and thought it would be great if
'they' could get something going for IOS. MY first thought when RubyMotion
came out was I needed to buy a license to support HipByte, I have never
regretted this and bought my
@Andy, I can't believe I missed that! Thanks!
--
Shaun
On Thursday, 16 May, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Andy Stechishin wrote:
@Shaun: I think RubyMotion 2 is that offering.
@Mark: Well said. I dabbled in MacRuby and thought it would be great if
'they' could get something going for IOS. MY
@John Labovitz,
you're able to run your ruby script in Rubymotion just like in Macruby, the
only thing you'll need to do is to replace *#!/usr/local/bin/macruby *with*
#!/Library/RubyMotion/bin/ruby *and you're ready to go.
cheers,
Mateus
On Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:24:07 PM UTC+2, John
IMHO MacRuby and now Rubymotion apps deployment is really reasy. To create a
release version of a .app in RubyMotion you just rake release and you're done.
For cross-platform development with Qt, Tk or wx, the situation in Python has
always been better than in Ruby. I don't know how we'll
I've changed my mind. :-)
I translated part of a project into Obj-C, and it just wasn't the same. I
*like* the Ruby language, and while MacRuby has its foibles, it's still very
good.
Here's my reasoning: Apple isn't going to do a consumer release of 10.9 any
time soon - according to the press
21 matches
Mail list logo
