«

Dear ruby lovers, we (the Q Software Solutions GmbH) have worked on a
Ruby IDE for Windows OSes for some time now. It will be a reasonable
priced IDE with a
working Resource Editor. We'll publish it in different steps.
- first it will be a base IDE whitout the Resource Editor (Editor,
Debugger-Frontend, Ruby interaction facilities
- browser (Modules, Classes, Functions etc.
- with the resource editor it will be possible to "lay-out" GUI
graphically; the framework of the applications and the callback code
will be generated and you will be able to jumb from the graphical view
ot the edit view and back.

Now we are a bit unsure about the browser facilities. We checked out
diverse Smalltalk implementations and other browsers. We wonder if you
would find it useful to have a "file-view". E.g if you have this

class Foo
include "whatever"


it might look like
- Foo
-- depends on "whatever"

Another question is would you prefer a Tree-view layout or a more
"traditional" Smalltalk layout?


Regards
Friedrich

il Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:42:11 +0100, Friedrich Dominicus
<> ha scritto::


just my 2 cents:

>Dear ruby lovers, we (the Q Software Solutions GmbH) have worked on a
>Ruby IDE for Windows OSes for some time now. It will be a reasonable
>priced IDE with a
>working Resource Editor.

this is nice to hear

>We'll publish it in different steps.
>- first it will be a base IDE whitout the Resource Editor (Editor,
>Debugger-Frontend, Ruby interaction facilities
>- browser (Modules, Classes, Functions etc.
>- with the resource editor it will be possible to "lay-out" GUI
>graphically; the framework of the applications and the callback code
>will be generated and you will be able to jumb from the graphical view
>ot the edit view and back.

I wonder how you do this: a win32ui or vruby or whatever?

>Now we are a bit unsure about the browser facilities. We checked out
>diverse Smalltalk implementations and other browsers. We wonder if you
>would find it useful to have a "file-view". E.g if you have this

I'd say yes

>Another question is would you prefer a Tree-view layout or a more
>"traditional" Smalltalk layout?


tree view.

gabriele renzi <> writes:
>
> I wonder how you do this: a win32ui or vruby or whatever?
At the moment we tend to emit code for vruby. But that's not fixed.

> I'd say yes
Ok, one opinion, let's see what other think.
>>Another question is would you prefer a Tree-view layout or a more
>>"traditional" Smalltalk layout?
>
>
> tree view.

Interesting, any reasons you like to share?

Regards
Friedrich

Friedrich Dominicus <> wrote:
> Another question is would you prefer a Tree-view layout or a more
> "traditional" Smalltalk layout?

The VisualWorks system browser (part of Cincom Smalltalk) can switch
between a package and a hierarchy view. This would be nice in Ruby,
too. A file based view could be used instead of the VisualWorks
package view.

A class hierarchy only makes sense if you load lots of classes into
the IDE. How do you handle overwrites, then?

Cheers
Sascha

il Thu, 19 Feb 2004 09:29:20 +0100, Friedrich Dominicus
<> ha scritto::


>> tree view.
>
>Interesting, any reasons you like to share?

prolly because I don't have a ST background
I mean, I find more natural to look at a tree view, that clearly
mimics my idea of the code (gerarchical) , just like someonw that
started programming in lisp finds more natural to use map() over for.
BTW, I'd second the idea to build something like the VisualWorks
system browser, that can swicth beetween the two.