Forum: IronRuby Ruby Libraries ==> IronRuby

Posted by Ryan Riley (Guest)
on 2009-12-17 18:15
(Received via mailing list)
Tomas's message below seems to reflect what I've been thinking lately. 
Does
anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or even
reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to getting 
more
libraries running on IronRuby? I'm supposing that IR performance will
continue to improve, and I like the idea of contributing to more than 
one
project (or reusing someone else's work). Is that a good idea? Should we
instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of this a case-by-case basis 
approach?
I have nothing concrete in mind, atm, I'm just wondering "out loud."

Cheers!

Ryan Riley

Email: ryan.riley@panesofglass.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/


On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas Matousek <
Posted by Jimmy Schementi (Guest)
on 2009-12-17 19:55
(Received via mailing list)
For the rest of our ~10% missing Ruby built-in/library support, using 
code from Rubinius could possibly make more things work. I’d try this 
out for a library you care about that isn’t implemented, see if you can 
get all the specs passing for that, and report back. =)

However, are you referring to “C-library ports to Ruby” that are outside 
the Ruby stdlib (as in, 3rd party libs, gems, etc)? I don’t know of many 
of those existing, but probably because I haven’t been looking, but 
again if they do exist their doesn’t seem like anything wrong with 
trying to get them working on IronRuby for more 3rd party library 
support. The only issues I see is if they somehow use Rubinius only 
features.

Another thing to be aware of is licensing; the IronRuby codebase is 
partitioned into three licenses, based on where we got the code from: 
Ms-Pl, Ruby license, and Creative Commons. If the intention is to commit 
these Ruby libraries into IronRuby to fill out our support, then we just 
need to be mindful of what license the incoming code.

~Jimmy

From: ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org 
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Riley
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:00 AM
To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org
Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==> IronRuby

Tomas's message below seems to reflect what I've been thinking lately. 
Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or 
even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to 
getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I'm supposing that IR 
performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of 
contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else's work). 
Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of 
this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, 
atm, I'm just wondering "out loud."

Cheers!

Ryan Riley

Email: ryan.riley@panesofglass.org<mailto:ryan.riley@panesofglass.org>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas Matousek 
<Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com<mailto:Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com>> 
wrote:
BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see 
ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to 
write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the 
cryptographic algorithms, of course.
If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to 
Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs.

Tomas
Posted by Jimmy Schementi (Guest)
on 2009-12-17 20:14
(Received via mailing list)
Correction: replace “Creative Commons” with CPL: 
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cpl1.0.php

From: ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org 
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Jimmy 
Schementi
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 10:55 AM
To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==> IronRuby

For the rest of our ~10% missing Ruby built-in/library support, using 
code from Rubinius could possibly make more things work. I’d try this 
out for a library you care about that isn’t implemented, see if you can 
get all the specs passing for that, and report back. =)

However, are you referring to “C-library ports to Ruby” that are outside 
the Ruby stdlib (as in, 3rd party libs, gems, etc)? I don’t know of many 
of those existing, but probably because I haven’t been looking, but 
again if they do exist their doesn’t seem like anything wrong with 
trying to get them working on IronRuby for more 3rd party library 
support. The only issues I see is if they somehow use Rubinius only 
features.

Another thing to be aware of is licensing; the IronRuby codebase is 
partitioned into three licenses, based on where we got the code from: 
Ms-Pl, Ruby license, and Creative Commons. If the intention is to commit 
these Ruby libraries into IronRuby to fill out our support, then we just 
need to be mindful of what license the incoming code.

~Jimmy

From: ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org 
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Riley
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:00 AM
To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org
Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==> IronRuby

Tomas's message below seems to reflect what I've been thinking lately. 
Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or 
even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to 
getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I'm supposing that IR 
performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of 
contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else's work). 
Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of 
this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, 
atm, I'm just wondering "out loud."

Cheers!

Ryan Riley

Email: ryan.riley@panesofglass.org<mailto:ryan.riley@panesofglass.org>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas Matousek 
<Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com<mailto:Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com>> 
wrote:
BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see 
ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to 
write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the 
cryptographic algorithms, of course.
If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to 
Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs.

Tomas
Posted by Shri Borde (Guest)
on 2010-02-07 10:26
(Received via mailing list)
About OpenSSL, IronPython already supports ssl 
(http://www.python.org/doc/2.6/library/ssl.html) and that code could be 
used as a starting point.

Not sure how much overlap there is between the two versions of SSL. Just 
updating the mailing list after hearing about the IronPython version 
recently...

________________________________
From: ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org 
[ironruby-core-bounces@rubyforge.org] on behalf of Ryan Riley 
[ryan.riley@panesofglass.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:59 AM
To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org
Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==> IronRuby

Tomas's message below seems to reflect what I've been thinking lately. 
Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or 
even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to 
getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I'm supposing that IR 
performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of 
contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else's work). 
Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of 
this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, 
atm, I'm just wondering "out loud."

Cheers!

Ryan Riley

Email: ryan.riley@panesofglass.org<mailto:ryan.riley@panesofglass.org>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/


On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas Matousek 
<Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com<mailto:Tomas.Matousek@microsoft.com>> 
wrote:
BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see 
ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to 
write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the 
cryptographic algorithms, of course.
If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to 
Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs.

Tomas
Please log in before posting. Registration is free and takes only a minute.
Existing account (Switch to SSL-encrypted connection)
NEW: Do you have a Google/GoogleMail or Yahoo account? No registration required!
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account
No account? Register here.