Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Ruby > Anyone interested In IronRuby

Reply
Thread Tools

Anyone interested In IronRuby

 
 
IronRuby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2007
Hello,

I am coming from Dot Net World, now totally into IronRuby.

IronRuby is a Dot Net Version of Ruby that works on DLR ( Dynamic
layer RunTime ) with all advantages of Ruby plus Dot Net Framework.

With IronRuby, you get best of both the worlds. Ruby and Dot Net. You
can also work with Ruby On Rails as well as Asp.Net with Ruby as your
coding language. isn't that great.

You can also work with MVC as well as LINQ.

PLUS>>>> you always have a great IDE like Visual Studio and Express
Products for working with Ruby.

Now... there is no need to work with Vb.Net or Boring C#

More details are here...
official site for IronRuby development

http://rubyforge.org/projects/ironruby/

The site of the creator of IronRuby ( Mr. John lam ) who works for
Microsoft for developing IronRuby.

www.iunknown.com

Small site with informative material
http://www.ironruby.net/

A good blogging site for IronRuby with updated material on Ruby and
IronRuby

http://ironruby.blogspot.com/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to know, how many folks here are waiting to start with
IronRuby and how many have already implemented this in one or another
way.

Is there a sub section or a seperate group in this forum for Ironruby.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please join this thread with yoiur information, so that we can start
an IronRuby Group that deals with Ruby and Dot Net in depth.

Thanks

IronRuby

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Alex Young
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2007
IronRuby wrote:
> I would like to know, how many folks here are waiting to start with
> IronRuby and how many have already implemented this in one or another
> way.

I've been meaning to dig into it for a little while now, but haven't had
time yet.

> Is there a sub section or a seperate group in this forum for Ironruby.

http://rubyforge.org/mail/?group_id=4359

--
Alex

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jayson Williams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2007
I am a little curious about Iron Ruby. I did some work with C#.net but
my interest faded for some reason or another. I really am very fond of
Ruby's feel. Learning Ruby kind of feels to me like getting acquainted
with a person you get along with very well. I find myself looking for
problems that Ruby would be good at solving, mainly to get more
acquainted with what its like to work with Ruby.
Squeezing Ruby through Microsofts CLR (or whatever its called) to make
it conform to .NET, is sort of like taking a friend and turning them
into a Borg or something (appropriately named IronRuby)...resistance
is futile!.
IronRuby can probably still get the job done, but the personality
will be a bit stiff, and not quite as friendly. But we shall see.

Jayson


On 9/27/07, Alex Young <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> IronRuby wrote:
> > I would like to know, how many folks here are waiting to start with
> > IronRuby and how many have already implemented this in one or another
> > way.

> I've been meaning to dig into it for a little while now, but haven't had
> time yet.
>
> > Is there a sub section or a seperate group in this forum for Ironruby.

> http://rubyforge.org/mail/?group_id=4359
>
> --
> Alex
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Phrogz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-27-2007
On Sep 26, 11:47 pm, IronRuby <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I would like to know, how many folks here are waiting to start with
> IronRuby and how many have already implemented this in one or another
> way.


I'm currently involved in the design of a large C# application
developed by my company, which is fully scriptable (currently) in
IronPython. As a strong Ruby advocate, I plan to fully support
IronRuby as well as soon as the DLR is released and feeling solid.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rikard Lindby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
Is IronRuby just like Ruby except you get the .Net platform?

If not, has MS contributed anything of what they have done to
"improve" the language to the ruby community?

Or If it is just like ruby + .Net, why didnt MS work with the
community to make the .Net stuff an extension to the real ruby,
instead of taking from the community and locking it to their platform?

Is this history repeating itself ? We don't like java because it is
controlled by sun. We cant make any money from it so lets take all the
good ideas sun has worked out do some improvements and call it our
own. (C#)
Or is it like... the list goes on and on.


Sorry about my grumpy attitude towards MS, but over the years I have
seen so much foul play from that company, so sometimes I feel the need
to cry out

On 9/28/07, Phrogz <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Sep 26, 11:47 pm, IronRuby <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > I would like to know, how many folks here are waiting to start with
> > IronRuby and how many have already implemented this in one or another
> > way.

>
> I'm currently involved in the design of a large C# application
> developed by my company, which is fully scriptable (currently) in
> IronPython. As a strong Ruby advocate, I plan to fully support
> IronRuby as well as soon as the DLR is released and feeling solid.
>
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Phrogz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
On Sep 27, 8:53 pm, "Rikard Lindby" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Is IronRuby just like Ruby except you get the .Net platform?


Read the links that started this thread, and:

http://www.wilcob.com/Wilco/IronRuby..._ironruby.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IronRuby

 
Reply With Quote
 
Alex Young
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
Rikard Lindby wrote:
> Is IronRuby just like Ruby except you get the .Net platform?

As I understand it, that's pretty much the intention, at least on a
language level. I *think* the intention is also to give Visual Studio
support, but I'm not sure about that.

> If not, has MS contributed anything of what they have done to
> "improve" the language to the ruby community?

They've opened the source to their implementation (for certain values of
"open" - there's still some aggro at the OSI about that), and they're
working with Novell to get the DLR working on Mono.

> Or If it is just like ruby + .Net, why didnt MS work with the
> community to make the .Net stuff an extension to the real ruby,
> instead of taking from the community and locking it to their platform?

Licensing, in a word. At least, that's the explanation that makes most
sense to me...

--
Alex

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lloyd Linklater
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
I agree with Rikard in that MS has a bad track record. Still I would
like to think that they would be willing to work and play well with the
other children. The last time this thread arose here, it was thought
that MS would make all the source available as in other gems. I asked
the MS guy that was posting in that thread to confirm that and got no
reply. Hopefully someone can answer that.

That being said, I have another question. What exactly *is* dot net?
Why is it so fervently touted? At work, a MS devotee that was
contracting at work changed our setup from .NET 1.1 to 2.0 without
telling anyone. It brought down the entire data warehouse. Asking
around, I was told that every version of .NET released was not as
backward compatible as advertised. We know that MS releases software
that breaks existing apps. Vista even breaks MS' apps. We cannot
afford to use .NET unless new versions will not break old apps.

So, what is the word? What is it, why do we want it, and will it
actually work?

p.s. I do not mean this to be incendiary. I am having trouble getting
through the hype in all I read about .NET and never seem to get straight
answers and personal experience, while it may be caused more by idiots
than .NET, still makes my company worried enough to avoid .NET until
they can answer this. Please read this as an attempt to find a way to
embrace the technology if I can find a way to do so not a flame against
MS.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Kellett
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Lloyd
Linklater <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>That being said, I have another question. What exactly *is* dot net?


A virtual machine (the Common Language Runtime). A very efficient one.
".Net" is the marketing term for the CLR and the frameworks that come
with it.

>Why is it so fervently touted?


Same reason Java is. In theory, write once, run anywhere there is a CLR.
You can write for .Net in C/C++/C#/Visual
Basic/Delphi/Fortran/Cobol/Python/Ruby.

>At work, a MS devotee that was
>contracting at work changed our setup from .NET 1.1 to 2.0 without
>telling anyone. It brought down the entire data warehouse.


That is possible. ECMA added some new opcodes (4 if I remember
correctly) and those got implemented in .Net 2.0. So if you build your
app with .Net 2.0 but then deployed that on a .Net 1.0/.Net 1.1 runtime
that would fail. That is not a failure of backward compatibility, that
is a failure caused by human stupidity.

..Net is backwards compatible - you can run 1.0 .Net apps on the 1.1 or
2.0 runtime. You can run 1.1 .Net apps on the 2.0 runtime.

Stephen
--
Stephen Kellett
Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/software.html
Computer Consultancy, Software Development
Windows C++, Java, Assembler, Performance Analysis, Troubleshooting
Reg Office: 24 Windmill Walk, Sutton, Ely, Cambs CB6 2NH.
 
Reply With Quote
 
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-28-2007
Lloyd Linklater wrote:
> I agree with Rikard in that MS has a bad track record. Still I would
> like to think that they would be willing to work and play well with the
> other children. The last time this thread arose here, it was thought
> that MS would make all the source available as in other gems. I asked
> the MS guy that was posting in that thread to confirm that and got no
> reply. Hopefully someone can answer that.


It's not necessarily a matter of "willing to work and play well with the
other children." Have you ever heard the phrase, "Don't sue anybody with
more money that you have?" It really doesn't matter to me whether or not
anything Microsoft does is licensed one way or another -- I use it when
I have to and I don't use it when I have a viable alternative.

A year or so ago -- Curt, Austin, correct me if I'm wrong here -- Curt
Hibbs and Austin Ziegler tried to get a sensible behavior from Microsoft
so a "One-Click Installer" Ruby user could build gems containing C
source using the no-cost-but-non-free Microsoft C compilers, along with
building Ruby itself that way. It never happened, and I wonder if
IronRuby is the reason. Perhaps Microsoft doesn't see the need for the
regular open source MRI interpreter now that there's IronRuby on the
CLR. No matter how "willing" Microsoft is to do things, there are always
going to be things they don't do



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Microsoft lessening commitment to IronPython and IronRuby Neil Hodgson Python 8 08-10-2010 04:29 PM
IronRuby Lloyd Linklater Ruby 19 09-29-2007 07:18 PM
First look at IronRuby Daniel Lucraft Ruby 0 07-23-2007 03:21 PM
Microsoft announces IronRuby Tim Hunter Ruby 5 05-01-2007 05:58 PM
Nikon users may be interested in this - especially if interested in D70 MB Digital Photography 0 02-26-2004 07:43 AM



Advertisments