Not to shamelessly plug or anything, but Ruby-Processing lets you create applets that run in the browser, are written in Ruby, and can use Processing to its full extent (opengl / hardware integration etc.) and provides some minimal shoes-like compatibility. I'm actually presenting on it tonight for the Freehackers Union in NYC, if anyone's around and interested.
(not trying to distract from the Shoes conversation) — omygawshkenas On 09/03/2008 "Leslie Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I agree that it's a stretch to imagine Shoes on the browser, but there are > several main drawbacks to Java / Flash / Silverlight. > These are all designed mainly for sandboxed execution and rich graphical > applications, but often times for prototyping, you need tighter desktop > integration or the ability to drop into native code, both of which J/F/S > aren't designed for. > > In contrast, the Shoes / Ruby MRI stack at least gives you is > (a) an easy way to extend web or web apps with native code (C or Ruby) via > Ruby gems and Ruby/C extensions > (b) a simpler DSL for UI authoring (in contrast to the XML-heavy, > type-rigid directions of modern J/F/S) > (c) an emphasis on Ruby and on tinker/bricolage innovation more generally > (more Haml than XAML, more jQuery than Dojo) > > To be specific, my most recent research involves prototyping with the Mapnik > mapping library written in C++, and there are many more rich media libraries > that go beyond <canvas> -- think more SIGGRAPH 2009 than SIGGRAPH 1974. For > example, how do we support rapid prototyping of multi-touch on the web? > Ubiquitous computing? Computational photography? > > While it's great that Processing.js and the like exist, to be really bold > and experimental, we (in the advanced prototyping / research / hacking > space) need to dip and dive deeper than modern notsofreaky sandboxes allow, > and hope that HacketyHackers won't be confined to such small but Flashy > spaces. > > ~L > > On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 5:41 AM, Bluebie, Jenna > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > I think you need to understand that it's a bit of a stretch that shoes will > > work as a desktop platform on OS-X, Linux, and Windows well, because > > currently, it doesn't it kind of sort of does... We are all hopeful, and > > there is plenty of progress each and every day towards that fantastic goal. > > There are many great places shoes could visit after that, like, perhaps the > > iPhone, and Android devices, and perhaps the web browser too. But until > > then, Shoes has plenty to be, plenty to live up to, and frankly, we don't > > need a new browser plugin for interactive widgets. We already have java > > (think jRuby + processing), flash (javascript is a fantastic language on > > it's own, available in a high speed bytecode compiled version in flash), and > > indeed also Silverlight, which is able to run ruby applications as a widget > > on macs and pc's via .NET, and is gaining support from open source platforms > > too. > > What the web really needs now, are quality web browsers with enough power > > to make fantastic javascript applications. Nobody wants to install one more > > plugin. They're a pain in the butt, and as google points out in their own > > comic, compromise google's ability to create a secure browser. Google is one > > of many pushing the forward now, especially with Chrome's V8 javascript > > engine, which I expect is even faster than ruby 1.9 would be, given it > > compiles javascript in to raw x86 machine code that runs straight on your > > cpu. There is no VM... the javascript becomes executable binary. > > > > So now we have compiled code execution speeds, brilliant css support, > > canvas, <audio> and <video> (at least in webkit, anyone tried these in > > Chrome yet?), and with John Resig's Processing.js, we have a good drawing > > api as well, with many more surely to follow. What exactly about embedded > > shoes would one up any of those things I wonder. > > > > How about this though, maybe this is better? Who wants to implement a java > > applet that builds in jRuby and a fake shoes interface that replicates shoes > > functionality via java's drawing api's, which thanks to Processing, we now > > are all quite aware, do not suck much. Could be nifty, and doesn't require > > users to install an obscure plugin with an even stranger name. > > > > On 03/09/2008, at 9:59 PM, Leslie Wu wrote: > > > > By now, some of you may have seen Google's new browser announcement, aka > > "Chrome" (http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/). > > I think what's exciting about this development is that there will finally > > be a modern, open source WebKit-based multi-platform browser engine that > > supports a plugin architecture and holds the promise of easier (?) > > hackability. > > > > Last year, I experimented with a whole bunch of different ways to better > > integrate the browser-as-app-engine and desktop (http://jinsync.com/), and > > looking now I see a blog post in May 2007 where I talked about the "future > > of the web (app)" -- http://jinsync.com/?q=node/14 -- and alas it took a > > while but Gears came out, and a year+ later, a beta version of Chrome is > > out. (Interesting also that Chrome generally addresses the notions I > > mentioned in March 2007 -- http://jinsync.com/?q=node/12) > > > > And while a RESTfully Organic FF didn't quite happen ( > > http://lwu.vox.com/library/post/on-the-future-of-the-fox.html), I'm at > > least hopeful that Shoes and perhaps HacketyHack will find their way mayhap > > into Chrome. What do you folks think of that -- who wants to implement Shoes > > as a Chrome plugin so that somedaysoon HH will be but a button clicks (3x) > > away? > > > > I've been brainstorming interesting Chrome <-> Shoes interactions, and I > > generally like the idea of being able to embed Shoes apps into webpages, > > whether statically or dynamically, such that Shoes apps can hit back and > > troll the DOM jQuery/Hpricot style and Chrome can send events to Shoes. > > Maybe what I'm really saying is, why not Shoes where today we find Flash? > > While I'm not proposing that Shoes take over (yet) the SWF world, Shoes does > > have nice native platform integration in terms of Ruby / Ruby gems and of > > course the ability to touch local resources through Ruby and/or > > C-implemented libraries (Hpricot / Mongrel). > > > > But if that's off in the horizon, have any folks experimented with embedded > > Shoes in Mongrel or versa vice? I'd like to be able to send data RESTfully > > from my browser to Shoes apps (to do super colorful graphics and the > > like)... > > > > ~L > > > > > > >
