On Nov 14, 2011, at 8:15 AM, Jean-Denis MUYS wrote:

> The workflow loop would then become:
> 
> 1- test some app action
> 2- notice a bug. Don't quit. Switch to Xcode.
> 3- change the relevant Ruby file
> 4- save
> 5- there is no step 5
> 
> I can't see any reason why this would not possible, and even easy, Ruby 
> newbie as I may be. To me, this is the major MacRuby promise, and that 
> promise is not kept yet.
> 
> Am I out of my mind?

I don't think you're out of your mind at all, and in fact this was the source 
of many "spirited discussions" that Laurent and I had about MacRuby and where 
it might someday go.   I have always felt that MacRuby's true potential was 
hidden behind the homogenizing IDE that is Xcode, just as the Eclipse IDE hides 
a fair amount of the power of Java in its attempt to create something more 
Visual-studio-like.

I think a static IDE is a fine tool for big, honkin' projects that are written 
in compiled languages like C or Fortran, in other words, but I think it 
somewhat lobotomizes the notion of truly interactive design and development as 
a consequence of focusing more on the project management side of things than 
promoting a REPL and introspective design style.  For examples of the latter, 
we need to go back to the Smalltalk workbench or the early LISP Machines, where 
everything from the "OS" to the highest layers of the system were easily 
introspected, recomposed into new code, and so on.

I harped on this so much, in fact, that Laurent recently sent me a link to this 
app; I'll admit that I have yet to purchase it, and I don't know how much it 
truly exemplifies the "graphical workspace" ideas that Laurent and I tossed 
around.  Just looking at the video, I have to suspect "not much",  but it's 
certainly more aligned in that direction than Xcode.  The idea of having your 
code "drawn on the back" of the windows created to run that code is kind of 
clever, and where I don't think it goes far enough is in the direction of 
having "software ICs" drawn on a screen with the ability to randomly string 
them together with the programming environment being clever enough to let you 
know visually when software lego block A does not fit with software lego block 
B, or being able to see your code as a set of graphical relationships with 
literal black boxes hiding the implementation details until you tap on them.

In short, I think chasing Xcode compatibility is a classic case of doing the 
obvious thing vs doing the most inspired thing.  Ruby isn't C, or any other 
static language, it's both a language and an environment, and yet everyone 
seems to be focused rather myopically on the former attribute to the detriment 
of the latter.  Sigh! :)

- Jordan

_______________________________________________
MacRuby-devel mailing list
MacRuby-devel@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macruby-devel

Reply via email to