Forum: Ruby [ANN} Komodo 3.5.1 -- a professional Ruby IDE

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-01 21:29
(Received via mailing list)
Yesterday, ActiveState released Komodo
3.5.1<http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/>,
an IDE for dynamic languages. This version fully supports Ruby on all
platforms (the previous version was not available on Windows). I just
blogged about it here:


http://blog.curthibbs.us/articles/2005/12/01/activ...

Curt
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-02 17:40
I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?

Komodo User's Guide says:

Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
a standalone ruby program.

Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?

Christer
ezra (Guest)
on 2005-12-02 21:07
(Received via mailing list)
On Dec 2, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Christer N. wrote:

> a standalone ruby program.
>
> Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
>
> Christer
>
> --


Thats just the way it works. It takes forever between page loads
because it has to load the rails framework, your rails app and
webrick all into the debugger so its just slow. The whole debugger is
pure ruby so the results you are getting are to be expected. They are
talking about rewriting the debugger in C to increase the speed though.

Cheers-

-Ezra Z.
Yakima Herald-Republic
WebMaster
http://yakimaherald.com
509-577-7732
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
sillydeveloper (Guest)
on 2005-12-02 22:45
(Received via mailing list)
I thought Komodo used to support code completion drop-downs... is this
not the case anymore? Or only in PHP and not Ruby?

AE
http://frugalprogrammer.com
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-02 23:14
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/2/05, Christer N. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?


Yes, I noticed this, too... running programs in debug mode is slow
(slower
than the debugger in ArachnoRuby or Eclipse/RDT). I'm not sure why,
though.


Komodo User's Guide says:
>
> Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
> any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
> has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
> a standalone ruby program.
>
> Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?


I haven't tried this, I wouldn't expect it to be any faster.

Curt
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-02 23:18
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/2/05, frugalprogrammer <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> I thought Komodo used to support code completion drop-downs... is this
> not the case anymore? Or only in PHP and not Ruby?
>
> AE
> http://frugalprogrammer.com



It does this in Ruby, too. But only if it knows what the type/class of a
variable is. So if I have

  test =  Array.new
  temp = "test string"

You'll get the code assist  on these two variables. But if all you have
is:

  def my_method(value)
  end

You won't get code assist on "value".

Curt
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-03 02:10
I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
Radrails is quite good, but still lacks the debugger. And it's really
random trying to start the server.

Is it really necessary for Komodo to try to debug ALL of the librarys ?

Christer
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-03 05:52
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/2/05, Christer N. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
> What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?


Komodo, ArachnoRuby, Eclipse/RDT, FreeRIDE. There's probably more, but
these
are the ones I know about.

Curt

Radrails is quite good, but still lacks the debugger. And it's really
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 06:59
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Christer,

> I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?

I'd give ArachnoRuby a try:  http://www.ruby-ide.com
(there's a 30 day free trial version.)

It's by far the fastest Ruby debugger I've seen.  I've used it to do
Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.

Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 13:59
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/5/05, Wayne V. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's
debugger
(all the other stuff is about the same speed).

Curt
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 14:43
curt.hibbs wrote:
> On 12/5/05, Wayne V. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>> Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
> I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's
> debugger
> (all the other stuff is about the same speed).
>
> Curt

I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !

Debugging with ArachnoRuby seems to be about 50% slower than direct
execution, which is completely acceptable.

Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby. Their web page wasn't
very convincing, but the numbers above are.

Christer
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 16:34
(Received via mailing list)
Thanks for the numbers. I had not actually timed it, but I knew there
was a
speed difference.

Curt
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 23:27
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Christer,

On 12/6/05, Christer N. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
> ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !
>
> Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby.

You're very welcome!

>Their web page wasn't very convincing, but the numbers above are.

I believe ArachnoRuby development is currently focused on enhancing
the product rather than doing PR/Website stuff.  So the product is
excellent, but the website doesn't fully convey that.

I think I've tried every Ruby IDE available on Windows (including some
lesser known ones like Mondrian), and ArachnoRuby is what I've chosen
to use.

I earn (part of) my living programming in Ruby, and I simply wouldn't
be able to do much of this work without ArachnoRuby.  Sometimes in my
work I have a Ruby script that takes an hour to run, which gets some
weird error near the end of the run.  Before ArachnoRuby I simply
couldn't debug these scripts, as in the other debuggers it would have
taken days to get to the point of reproducing the error.  So there
were many projects I couldn't even attempt in Ruby, because I knew
that if I had a problem I might not be able to effectively debug it.

I've been using ArachroRuby for well over a year.  Sometimes I use it
8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week.  It's never let me down.  It is still
in beta, so there are occasional glitches, but they're pretty minor.
It used to crash at times (that's become pretty infrequent lately),
but when this happened I'd just restart it.  It would automatically
re-open the files I'd had open, and I'd pick up where I left off.  I
only lost code I'd typed once or twice, and this was never more than a
line or so.  Not a big deal.

Two of the features I like a lot are the Ruby Gems browser (Tools
menu, then "Ruby Gems Browser...") which makes RubyGems so much easier
to work with than the usual command line tools,

and the Ruby Class browser  (Tools menu, then "Ruby Class
Browser...").  Currently the class browser only works with the classes
in Ruby and in the standard library, but in the future you'll be able
to add your own classes to it.

(I have no financial or other connection with ArachnoRuby, except as a
_very_ satisfied user and beta tester.)

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
phurley (Guest)
on 2005-12-06 23:39
(Received via mailing list)
I will second the recommendation. I really like ArachnoRuby and have
it open about 8 hours of everyday now. Lothar (the author) has been
very responsive when I needed/desired a feature. As has been stated
there are a few glitches here and there, but all and all it is the
best tool I have found as well.

Patrick
hankgong (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 00:04
(Received via mailing list)
Hi, did you try the Ruby editor RDE?
What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
bad...
Most important thing is that it's free!!!

Hank
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 00:44
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Hank,

On 12/6/05, Hank G. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Hi, did you try the Ruby editor RDE?
> What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
> bad...

Yes, I used RDE for a year or more before ArachnoRuby was available.
It was OK for its time, but the debugger was just soooo slooooow.  It
was RDE that I was using when in my earlier post I mentioned there
were projects that I just couldn't do in Ruby because I wouldn't be
able to debug them.

When ArachnoRuby came out I switched from RDE and I've never regretted
it.

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
florgro (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 00:48
(Received via mailing list)
Curt H. wrote:

>>I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
>>What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
>
> Komodo, ArachnoRuby, Eclipse/RDT, FreeRIDE. There's probably more, but these
> are the ones I know about.

What about ruby-breakpoint? There's no graphical front end just yet, but
I would still consider it a debugger. :)
basi_lio (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 02:58
(Received via mailing list)
As a total noobie, I am still unfamiliar with Ruby syntax. ArachnoRuby
tells you if the line is syntactically malformed (sometimes too
eagerly!) and you fix the line before compilingt Saves time. At this
point, this is ArachnoRuby's selling point for me. When it reaches 1.0,
and I'm convinced Ruby is my next programming language (and it looks
like that is becoming a certainty -- the user group is outstandingly
helpful and very knowledgeable!), I'll get me a registered copy.
basi
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 04:03
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/6/05, basi <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> As a total noobie, I am still unfamiliar with Ruby syntax. ArachnoRuby
> tells you if the line is syntactically malformed (sometimes too
> eagerly!) and you fix the line before compilingt Saves time. At this
> point, this is ArachnoRuby's selling point for me. When it reaches 1.0,
> and I'm convinced Ruby is my next programming language (and it looks
> like that is becoming a certainty -- the user group is outstandingly
> helpful and very knowledgeable!), I'll get me a registered copy.
> basi


Yes, this is  a nice feature. It should be noted that Eclipse/RDT and
Komodo
both do this as well.

Curt
hankgong (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 07:34
(Received via mailing list)
Oh, I c. I didn't make big Ruby program yet!
Could you tell me how big was your program? RDE can not handle it
because
the debug speed is too slow?

Hank
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 13:29
Wayne!

I agree with your comment on Arachno. It's amazing that one person,
Lothar, can achieve so much.

Could you please explain slimeline and debugger quick mode ?
Have you tried Arachno in a Rails project ?

Christer
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 19:37
(Received via mailing list)
Hey Christer,

> Could you please explain slimeline and debugger quick mode ?

slimeline mode is for conserving screen real estate, especially on
1024x768
monitors.  It has options to hide the tabs at the sides of the window,
and
to hide various other UI elements, to give the maximum amount of space
to
the main window.  It's a nice idea, but personally I don't use it even
on my
1024x768 laptop because I really like seeing all the tools and other UI
elements.

The default debugger mode is quick mode, in which it doesn't have as
much
information about stack frames other than the current one.  I don't
believe
this has any effect when you're debugging in the current stack frame.
It
only makes a difference when you use the debugger to navigate to
previous stack frames (that is, the method that called the current
method,
or earlier callers.)  When quick mode is turned off, the debugger runs
slower, but it gets more information on previous stack frames.  (I hope
I got this right... Lothar explained this to me once, and this is my
understanding of what he said.)   In practice I don't pay a lot of
attention
to whether or not I'm in quick mode.  Non-quick mode doesn't seem to
slow the debugger down that much (at least for small programs), but then
again I haven't noticed a huge amount of difference in the info I get on
previous stack frames.

> Have you tried Arachno in a Rails project ?

I do all my Rails work in Arachno, since it's such a great environment.

I've done some Rails debugging in Arachno, using both of the techniques
described at:

http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pages/How+To+Use...

I haven't done a ton of Rails debugging, mostly because I don't need a
debugger for most of my Rails work, but when I have debugged Rails
programs in Arachno it's been plenty fast.

Take care,

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
mark.ericson (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 19:41
(Received via mailing list)
I've been playing with Arachno and wish it had hyper navigation of the
code
(like IDEA or Eclipse in the Java world).  It would be great to
ctrl-click
on a variable or function call and open up the source to that call in a
new
window.

Is that perhaps already in the product and I've missed it?
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 20:17
Wayne!

I tried Debugger Quick and Slow mode. No difference. Same speed. Local
variables and parameters available on all the stack frames. Maybe this
feature is used in the other languages supported: Perl, PHP and Python

  Slimeline is not so interesting on my 1600 x 1200 display. Good news
that Rails works well on ArachnoRuby. I've chipped in USD129 to Lothar

Thanks for the link!

Christer
phurley (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 21:10
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/7/05, Mark E. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I've been playing with Arachno and wish it had hyper navigation of the code
> (like IDEA or Eclipse in the Java world).  It would be great to ctrl-click
> on a variable or function call and open up the source to that call in a new
> window.

I do not think this is in the current editor. In any case it would not
be possible to get right all of the time -- but it would be possible
to get right most of the time and would be a nice feature. Within a
file the navigator pane shows all of your normally defined methods
(and a nice fly over documentation window as well).

pth
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 21:15
(Received via mailing list)
Hey Christer,

> I tried Debugger Quick and Slow mode. No difference.

Thanks for the data point.  I didn't do any explicit tests, but I didn't
really
notice a difference between the two modes.

> Thanks for the link!

You're very welcome.  Actually, I also sent you this link yesterday in a
private email.  Maybe it got caught in your spam filter or something.
Let me know if you didn't get that email, and I'll resend it.

Take care,

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
the.mindstorm.mailinglist (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 21:19
(Received via mailing list)
I am a user of Arachno for quite a while and I am quite happy with it,
except one aspect: the promise on the site about releases. I haven't
seen an update for a while, and I would expect at least some
feedback/estimations about this.

cheers,

./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 21:23
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Hank,

> Could you tell me how big was your program?

The Ruby program was only a few hundred lines, but it took a long while
to run because it was processing 5 million lines of text contained in
tens of thousands of files, and it was running on a 500MHz Pentium III.

> RDE can not handle it because the debug speed is too slow?

That's correct.  It was getting an error after about an hour of running
(without the debugger).  RDE's debugger is so slow that it probably
would have taken days to reach that point if I ran in the debugger.

Take care,

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
nightphotos (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 21:43
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Alexandru,

> I am a user of Arachno for quite a while and I am quite happy with it,
> except one aspect: the promise on the site about releases. I haven't
> seen an update for a while

Yes, it would be nice to see a new release.  I had an email exchange
with
Lothar a while ago, and he was deeply into making some major changes
to the code.  (He told me what he was working on, but since it
was a private conversation I won't repeat what he said.)

As someone who's considered writing and marketing a program myself,
I can empathize with having to simultaneously do design/development/
marketing/support/etc/etc/etc.

I'm always glad to see the new features Lothar puts in, but the
current version of Arachno is 100% usable for my day-to-day work.

Take care,

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
jeff.darklight (Guest)
on 2005-12-07 22:32
(Received via mailing list)
I use it from time to time @ this point ... the most recent beta release
is
a bit less stable than I'd prefer, but Lothar is hard @ work on making
the
foundation of the application more solid...

He's done a really good job with Arachno ... and I can't wait for the
next
release ...

Just before the release he had started working on scriptability for the
environment ... ( to allow external custom scripts be able to interact
with
the software ) ... and he had added some nice auto templates and
electric
braces ...

All of which I love ... it really is a GOOD environment.

j.

On 12/7/05, Wayne V. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> was a private conversation I won't repeat what he said.)
> Wayne
>
> ---
> Wayne V.
> No Bugs Software
> "Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
>
>


--
"Remember. Understand. Believe. Yield! -> http://ruby-lang.org"

Jeff W.
eric.promislow (Guest)
on 2005-12-08 21:28
(Received via mailing list)
Just coming in to this thread to agree that the Komodo debugger is
relatively
slow.  We originally wrote the debugger in pure Ruby, and found
debugging
large programs was very slow.  We're shipping a version where a couple
of
the bottlenecks were rewritten in C, but that has revealed other
bottlenecks.

One thing I should point out is that the Komodo Ruby debugger works
with
any installed version > 1.8.0.  We don't silo our own interpreter, so
whatever the
debugger says your code is doing, that's what it will most likely do
when
deployed.  On the other hand, there is a fundamental speed-up I'd like
to do,
but it requires working with the API as of 1.8.3.  At that point it
seems to make
sense to offer our own embedded interpreter optimized for faster
debugging,
but this falls in the thinking-out-loud category at this point.

- Eric
curt.hibbs (Guest)
on 2005-12-08 21:36
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/8/05, Eric P. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> One thing I should point out is that the Komodo Ruby debugger works
> debugging,
> but this falls in the thinking-out-loud category at this point.


Thanks for enlightening us, Eric.

Curt
ronjeffries (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 04:04
(Received via mailing list)
Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.

And I sure wish some of these projects would pick up on the Agile / XP
thing of
releasing solid code every week. It's not really that hard to do ...

It does look interesting, thanks for the folks who posted about it.
tsumeruby (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 10:40
(Received via mailing list)
On Sunday 11 December 2005 11:02 am, Ron J. wrote:
> Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
> documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.

Perhaps a waste of time to some people, but documentation comes very
good to
new people who want to program ruby. I think Lothar has forgotten what
its
like to be a new programmer.

Tsume
Ron J. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 23:54
(Received via mailing list)
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:39:34 +0900, removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

>On Sunday 11 December 2005 11:02 am, Ron J. wrote:
>> Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
>> documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
>
>Perhaps a waste of time to some people, but documentation comes very good to
>new people who want to program ruby. I think Lothar has forgotten what its
>like to be a new programmer.

Or even an old programmer who would like to know how to use Arachno
well.
Patrick H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-12 23:43
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/11/05, Ron J. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Or even an old programmer who would like to know how to use Arachno well.
I understand what you guys are saying, but if given the choice between
docs about the editor and a working Ruby macros with even a couple of
examples -- I know which I would pick.

pth
soxinbox (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 03:08
(Received via mailing list)
I think it should be free or have documentation. I don't think I should
have
to invest both the time to figure out the editor without documentation,
and
also pay for the product. I am willing to do either, but not both. After
using Arachno for the trial period, I am convinced it is a very good
product. I may decide to purchase in the future, but up till now, I
can't
bring myself to pay $80 for an undocumented product.
Perhaps Lothar could trade free copies for documentation.

Some may have spotted the irony that I have already spent the time to
learn
the tool, and would now not need the documentation. I am just stuborn
that
way.

And just to reiterate, this is a great editor, and should be considered
by
anyone that is developing ruby professionaly or can convince some
corperate
behemoth to pay for it.
Wayne V. (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 10:12
(Received via mailing list)
> I can't bring myself to pay $80...

Actually, it's US $59, with volume discounts starting at 2 licenses.

Wayne

---
Wayne V.
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
tony summerfelt (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 15:31
(Received via mailing list)
soxinbox wrote on 12/12/2005 8:07 PM:

> to invest both the time to figure out the editor without documentation,

"figure it out"

i'm productive with both komodo and arachno-ruby...i didn't need to
figure anything out. i just used it.

granted, it wasn't 2 hours before a major project was due that i fired
up one of them and decided i needed to learn them as i was fnishing up
 code...

i find both komodo and arachnoruby relatively intuitive. took me a few
minutes to get comfortable with each.

i'm sure if lothar gets annoyed enough at answering questions that
should in documentation he might release something...i'd much prefer
arachnoruby gets worked on before any time is spent on the docs...
and
Christer N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 16:08
tony summerfelt wrote:
>i'm productive with both komodo and arachno-ruby...

tony,

can you tell as about any debugger speed differences between komodo and
arachno?

what reasons do you see for using both?

christer
Jeff W. (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 19:57
(Received via mailing list)
Arachnos debugger is best-in-class...  it *BY FAR* out runs any of the
other
IDE debuggers...

j.

On 12/13/05, Christer N. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> christer
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
>


--
"Remember. Understand. Believe. Yield! -> http://ruby-lang.org"

Jeff W.
Peter E. (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 20:15
(Received via mailing list)
I personally think it's a pain...

arachno:

 last update: August(!)
 status: at most beta
 documentation: close to non-existent
 rails-support: hidden but there

komodo:
 ruby support:  very rudimentary, just to say "we can do ruby",
                probably initiated by marketing wussies
 rails support: err, say what?

TextMate:
 mac-os-only *aarg*

On Windows, I suggest (and use)


http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file...

with

 http://sourceforge.net/projects/rubyeclipse

and

 http://www.eclipse.org/webtools

What you guys use?


Regards
Peter
tony summerfelt (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 20:30
(Received via mailing list)
Christer N. wrote on 12/13/2005 9:09 AM:

> can you tell as about any debugger speed differences between komodo and
> arachno?

i much prefer the debugger in arachnoruby. i often need to debug
threads and it's a breeze using the arachnoruby debugger for that. and
of course it's faster. i found ruby thread debugging in komodo a bit
confusing, but it's entirely possible that i'm too used to using
arachnoruby for that

> what reasons do you see for using both?

for myself i also write perl and tcl/tk code and komodo is one stop
shopping there. i  had komodo registered before the full ruby support
was added.

if i was only writing in ruby i'd would use  arachnoruby exclusively.
and even though  it's still an early release it's completely usable
for me...
Gene T. (Guest)
on 2005-12-13 22:55
(Received via mailing list)
tony summerfelt wrote:
> Christer N. wrote on 12/13/2005 9:09 AM:
>
> for myself i also write perl and tcl/tk code and komodo is one stop
> shopping there. i  had komodo registered before the full ruby support
> was added.
>
> if i was only writing in ruby i'd would use  arachnoruby exclusively.
> and even though  it's still an early release it's completely usable
> for me...

agreed, if you're doing perl, C, python, PHP, java etc you have 6
choices that i know of: vim, emacs, komodo, textmate, jedit and eclipse
in all its variations.  Any others?

and agreed on arachno, it works well and if you have serious issues,
Lothar will respond quickly.  I get the feeling he doesn't have a lot o
free time to eat donuts and watch Tv, so docs to come.  And that's
"slimline" mode, folks.
Javaman49 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 05:43
My first post. <b>testing html</b>
Javaman49 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 05:59
By a Newbie, for Newbies.

I'm trying to get started with Ruby development, and have just spent a
couple of days looking for an IDE. In my googling, I came across this
forum several times, so it seems to be a good for posting my
experiences. I apologise for the long post, but it does seem to be
relevant.

My background - 20 years experience, with a mix of Linux and Windows.
I'm Currently profficient with Visual Studio, and was once profficient
with emacs. I can do simple tasks with vi. I have also used several
IDE's in addition to Visual Studio - such as Oracle JDeveloper and
Delphi.

My favourite IDE to date - Visual Studio 2003/5, for it's good looks,
lightning response, intellisense, code completion, integration of
different languages, code navigation, good window organisation, ... in
short, because it offers a huge range of features within a well
structured and light feeling UI.

If there were a Ruby plugin for Visual Studio, I would have gone
straight to that, and been willing to pay, say, $200 for it, but there
isn't, so I went on a great Ruby editor hunt.

The hunt

After several days of massive googling, downloading, and configuring, I
discovered that there is no product which comes close to being a "Ruby
for Visual Studio", but the best overall, and quite usable, was
Arachnoruby. At $29, for the non-commercial version, it's not free, but
is cheap.

I will give a run-down of all the editors and IDE's I tried. Most of
these I would have found to be an acceptable Ruby editor, however there
was always something which made Arachnoruby preferable, and worth paying
$29 for. Obviously, I may have done an injustice to any of these, and
missed an important quality. In that case, I apologise and am happy to
be corrected. Nevertheless, in my 2 days of looking for a Ruby editor, I
had to go on first impressions, and Arachnoruby the one I kept coming
back to.

I am running an AMD 2800, with 750 MB of RAM. I dual boot Windows XP,
and Xandros Linux.

1. Free general editors, plugins needed...

eclipse - The only one of the "free, plus plugin" tools where the plugin
could be located and installed with a wizard. It did take me some failed
attempts to achieve this, but I put that down to my unfamiliarity with
eclipse. RoR support is in development, which is a big plus. The Ruby
plugin seemed to work nicely, but didn't do "as you type" indentation.
It does provide "formatting", on a keystroke, but "as you type"
indentation is worth a lot to me. The other Ruby features were nice, but
not as important to me as the indentation.

jedit - couldn't get it running in Xandros. I have used it in the past
in Windows.

My overall impression of Java based editors (eclipse, jedit) is that the
"look" is good, and sometimes "great", but the "feel" is sluggish. They
would have to have very strong Ruby support to make me prefer them to a
"lighter" editor.

emacs - an old favourite of mine, but I've used fully graphical IDE's
for too long to want to go back to it's keystroke based command set. To
me, it is easier to think about a program when you are not thinking
about how to navigate the editor. The plugin seemed to work quite nicely
for indentation, but I didn't get syntax highlight working. I assume
that the auto-complete function is just the old emacs one of looking for
words in the current file. I believe that emacs is (or was) the
preferred editor of the the Ruby "owners", so it must offer a lot to
those willing to invest the time.

Vim -From the net buzz Ruby support seems to be mature, and while I
enjoy vim for small tasks, I've never used it for serious programming. A
quick look at the instructions for installing Ruby support (only for the
dedicated) was enough to make me move on to more promising (for me)
products.

gedit - Slow, in Xandros. Perhaps this is because it is a Gnome app
running  on a KDE desktop. The Ruby plugin mentioned on the net didn't
seem to have enough to recommend it to make it worthwhile trying.

cream - Some Ruby support "out of the box". It provided nice syntax
highlight, and an "auto-indent" option (but this didn't work for me). It
is nice and light, being vim based, and is switchable between GUI and
raw VIM mode. It seemed worth more investigating.

2. A cross platform, pure Ruby editor

FreeRIDE - Overall, very good, and promises more. Automatic indentation
is adequate, but not complete. The integration of interpreter, debugger
and Ruby manuals is there, but not as well organised (to my eye), as in
Arachnoruby. Recommended.

SciITE - A nice place to start. It is light and clean, and does syntax
highlighting and basic indentation (as per FreeRIDE) but just doesn't do
very much as a Ruby editor.

3. KDE based

I love the look and feel of KDE applications, so I would have been keen
to get Ruby working in one of these...

kate - A very nice programmers editor. It was difficult to locate and
install the Ruby plugins, and when I did they were adequate, but seemed
to only provide syntax highlighting. No auto-indent, or other strong
Ruby support.

kdevelop - couldn't install it on Xandros

Quanta - It installed first time with an "apt-get" in Xandros. A truely
beautiful editor! I couldn't get any Ruby support running though.
However, I might be using it for HTML in the future, and if it gets good
Ruby support, then I'll be having another look.

4. Did not try -

slickedit
komodo

Both of these are mature, cross language, cross platform editors, with
"add-ons" for Ruby. Both are expensive, and after looking at the feature
sets, and reviews, I couldn't see any reason to try them when
Arachnoruby seemed to match them (for Ruby development) at $29.

5. My winner, Arachnoby

Works out of the box! It has Ruby syntax highlighting, very nice "as you
type" indentation, debugger, live syntax checking. The default colour
scheme is garish, but an alternative scheme can be selected. The
auto-complete function is basic - it just looks for identifiers within
the current file. This, however, is as good as any I found during my
investigation. It's still in beta - version 0.6.5, so some of the
features are only stubs, but the stubs seem to be in the right place,
and look promising for a great Ruby IDE. Arachno uses a cross platform
widget set, which has some drawbacks. The "look" is reasonably modern
and graphical, but not as sharp as it could be - KDE and Windows both
look better. The "feel" is as responsive as a native application.

So, I can only go on first impressions, but the first impression of
Arachnoruby was the best of all. In addition, longtime users on the net
praise it.

So, my recommendations...

1. If you are a heavy user of emacs, jedit, vim, kate, kdevelop
etc..then find the Ruby plugin for you. However, you probably wouldn't
be looking here anyway.

2. FeeRIDE is a good place to start for anyone else.

2. Arachnoruby is, in my humble, and not very well informed opinion, the
best of them all for someone looking for a new IDE, and well worth $29

A final note: I was looking for a Linux editor, in Xandros, which is
Debian based. Arachnoruby is cross platform, but the Windows version is
ahead of the others. I decided to continue with version 0.5.6 in Linux,
rather than version 6.5 in windows. My first attempt at running 6.5 with
Cross-Over office didn't succeed. I'll try again later, but for the
moment I've had enough of installing and configuring, and want to get on
with Ruby coding!
Eric A. (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 06:11
(Received via mailing list)
Spectacular evaluation. I greatly appreciate it.
I'll be taking a close look at Arachnoby.

My favorite IDE for Java is CodeGuide, and
my favorite editor for other tasks is UltraEdit
(both windows based).

Would love to see Ruby support for those,
as well.
:_)
Eric A. (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 06:11
(Received via mailing list)
Kev J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 07:13
(Received via mailing list)
>>
>> If there were a Ruby plugin for Visual Studio, I would have gone
>> straight to that, and been willing to pay, say, $200 for it, but
>> there isn't, so I went on a great Ruby editor hunt.
>
I'd suggest looking at Sapphire in Steel[1] - it's still in beta, but it
seems to be the Ruby plugin for Visual Studio that you are really
looking for.  Personally I can't stand VS, but to each his own.

Kev

[1] http://sapphiresteel.com/2006/03/28/11/
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 08:53
Eric A. wrote:
> Spectacular evaluation. I greatly appreciate it.

Thanks Eric. I was unsure about making such a long post, so I appreciate
the feedback, and I'm glad that it has helped.

- Javaman
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 09:02
Kev J. wrote:
>>>
>>> If there were a Ruby plugin for Visual Studio, I would have gone
>>> straight to that, and been willing to pay, say, $200 for it, but
>>> there isn't, so I went on a great Ruby editor hunt.
>>
> I'd suggest looking at Sapphire in Steel[1] - it's still in beta, but it
> seems to be the Ruby plugin for Visual Studio that you are really
> looking for.  Personally I can't stand VS, but to each his own.
>
> Kev
>
> [1] http://sapphiresteel.com/2006/03/28/11/

Thanks Kevin. Sapphire looks interesting, and they may produce a great
IDE in time. I think that despite my advocacy of VS, I'm actually
happier having something Linux based, which does the job, even if it
isn't quite as slick as VS..
(oh well, nowhere near as slick as VS) :)
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 09:24
(Received via mailing list)
Just out of curiosity, did you look at all at the "QT Ruby" family in
conjunction with KDE? This is a collection of packages including
"kommander", "korundum" and "qtruby". They are essentially flavors of
the QT designer tools and are documented in the Pragmatic Programmers
book "Rapid GUI Development with QTRuby". The URL is

http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/titles/ctrubyqt...

I am not sure how well these work on Windows; I'm pretty sure QTRuby
does, but "korundum" is KDE-specific and I'm not sure about "kommander".

Javaman59 wrote:
>> Kev
>
>

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

http://linuxcapacityplanning.com
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 09:46
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, did you look at all at the "QT Ruby" family in
> conjunction with KDE? This is a collection of packages including
> "kommander", "korundum" and "qtruby". They are essentially flavors of
> the QT designer tools and are documented in the Pragmatic Programmers
> book "Rapid GUI Development with QTRuby". The URL is
>
> http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/titles/ctrubyqt...
>
> I am not sure how well these work on Windows; I'm pretty sure QTRuby
> does, but "korundum" is KDE-specific and I'm not sure about "kommander".
>
> Javaman59 wrote:
>>> Kev
>>
>>
>
> --
> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
>
> http://linuxcapacityplanning.com

Yes, I did come across that site and it was what led me try KDevelop,
and Quanta, because I hoped to get IDE support for Ruby QT development.
I'll probably be revisiting the site once I'm up and running with Ruby.

Thanks :)

- Javaman
Roy S. (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 10:43
(Received via mailing list)
Javaman59 wrote:
>> I am not sure how well these work on Windows; I'm pretty sure QTRuby
>>
>> http://linuxcapacityplanning.com
>>
>
> Yes, I did come across that site and it was what led me try KDevelop,
> and Quanta, because I hoped to get IDE support for Ruby QT development.
> I'll probably be revisiting the site once I'm up and running with Ruby.
>
> Thanks :)
>
> - Javaman
Did you try RadRails[1] out?  I realize that it's built upon Eclipse but
it does have the benefit of being a stand-alone product that bundles
everything you need for Ruby and Rails development.

[1]  http://www.radrails.org/
Alexandru E. Ungur (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 11:29
(Received via mailing list)
>>> sender: "Javaman49" date: "Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 10:59:56AM +0900" <<<EOQ
Hi,

> 5. My winner, Arachnoby
My winner, Vim7 +
http://blog.hasno.info/blog/segfault/?month=4&day=...

> Works out of the box!
Ok, you got me there, it dosen't work right out of the box, you have to
'install' a few plugins, that is to copy them to $HOME/.vim/plugins or
whatever...

> It has Ruby syntax highlighting,
That it has, right out of the box I believe,

> very nice "as you type" indentation,
That too,

> debugger,
Mmm, Ruby has that by itself, don't really miss it,

> live syntax checking.
That can be setup, no problem,

> The default colour scheme is garish,
The default color is nice ;),

> but an alternative scheme can be selected.
Here too,

> The auto-complete function is basic - it just looks for identifiers within
> the current file.
Aha, so does Vim7... out of the box, *but*, with the above mentioned
plugin you get 'intellisens' for real, that is autocompleting the
methods, not the 'words in the file'... Yummy!

jEdit is also really nice, so is SciTE, I've used them both, however...
Vim is Vim...  I probably forgot to mention a few thigs as well, but
the time invested in (re)learning it, it really pays off in the end.
Oh, BTW, you can find the official Vim configuration files for the
compilation, indenting, and syntax highlighting of Ruby files here:
http://rubyforge.org/projects/vim-ruby/


Good luck,
Alex
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 13:52
Roy S. wrote:
>> - Javaman
> Did you try RadRails[1] out?  I realize that it's built upon Eclipse but
> it does have the benefit of being a stand-alone product that bundles
> everything you need for Ruby and Rails development.
>
> [1]  http://www.radrails.org/

Yes, I do remember trying RadRails. This was quite early in my
investigation, and my memory is a bit fuzzy :).. I think that I tried
out it in Windows, and was impressed with the Ruby support, but when I
switched to Xandros the RadRails site was down, so I left it there.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll have another look at it when I move
on to RoR.
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 14:07
Alexandru E. Ungur wrote:
>> 5. My winner, Arachnoby
>My winner, Vim7 +
> .... (why Vim7 )...
> Good luck,
> Alex

Thanks Alex, and thanks for all the info. I won't be having another look
at Ruby in Vim real soon, but putting all that info in one place should
be helpful to anyone reading this thread. I might have given Vim more of
a chance if I'd known all that 24 hours ago. I especially like your
"intellisense" details and the installation does look straightforward. A
debugger is very important to me. Isn't a debugger important in the
Agile approach?

Regards,

Javaman
Kev J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-17 14:30
(Received via mailing list)
>debugger is very important to me. Isn't a debugger important in the
>Agile approach?
>
>
No a debugger isn't important for an agile approach.  Unit tests which
can be automated are of much more value than a breakpointed debugger
IMO.  Using graphical debugging (breakpoints, step-through/over etc)
isslow and not worth the time it takes to learn them.  Unit tests on the
other hand are fast, can be automated to run when you aren't at the
computer and can be used as part of an continuous build process.
Debuggers are not part of the Agile approach, unit tests are.  See XP
[1]

I'm not saying that debuggers have no value at all, but just that in all
my time coding (ok only 9 years with six being professional), I've
*never*/not once used one.  In java you read the stack as it's unwound,
and trace back to see what you did wrong, in ruby I do something similar
(should I get a failing app).  Before you get that far, you make sure
you have unit tests, and they catch most errors for you.  Debuggers seem
to be fully ingrained in the MS VisualStudio world, many of the java
developers here who came over from VB still use the debugger in Eclipse,
but it's much much slower than reading the stack trace, and without the
test, how can you prove that that the bug has been squashed?

Kev

[1]http://www.xprogramming.com/
David C. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 04:03
(Received via mailing list)
On Monday 17 April 2006 06:28 am, Kev J. wrote:
>
>
You twice mention 'reading the stack trace' in Java.  That only helps if
you
HAVE a stack trace.  Many bugs don't involve exceptions.  I'm all for
unit
tests, but sometimes a debugger is faster.  I will occaisionally use a
debugger to see why my test is/isn't passing.  In the latter case, I'll
may
find another needed test.  Either way, it's a smell that something is
too
large and complex.  But it does help.
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 04:56
Kev J. wrote:
>
>
> No a debugger isn't important for an agile approach.  Unit tests which
> can be automated are of much more value than a breakpointed debugger
> IMO.
Thanks for the info. I'm always happy to be corrected :)

> Using graphical debugging (breakpoints, step-through/over etc)
> is slow and not worth the time it takes to learn them.
When I had nine years experience I also rarely used a debugger, for the
same reasons.

I eventually *had* to start using a debugger to track very difficult
problems, and once I had made that investiment, I started to include it
as a normal tool, for...

1. understanding other people's code.
2. I've already used the ArachoRuby debugger in my attempts to
understand the Ruby language.
3. to track down deep and difficult problems (most of which have been
related to memory management, in languages such as c++).
4. To quickly partition a problem. If the input/output of a large
section of code is wrong, then I'll often do a binary chop with the
debugger to quickly find where it's going wrong.

David C. wrote:
>You twice mention 'reading the stack trace' in Java.  That only helps if you
>HAVE a stack trace.  Many bugs don't involve exceptions.
Amen!

> Either way, it's a smell that something is too
> large and complex.  But it does help.
hmmmm... you've got me there.. using Visual Studio and VC++ (or VB),
tends to push me towards a compile/link/test/debug cycle, rather than
unit testing. I'm looking forward to seeing whether Ruby, RoR, and a
"lighter" environment (Arachno and bash), changes things.

Kev J. wrote:

> many of the java developers here who came over from VB still use the
> debugger in Eclipse, but it's much much slower ... and without the
> test, how can you prove that that the bug has been squashed?

Good observation. See also mine and David's above. :)

Cheers,

Javaman
Mark Haniford (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 05:19
(Received via mailing list)
I'd take a look at Komodo.    I'm not sure how much it costs, but when
I tried the trial version I was pretty impressed.

I'm looking forward to trying out the VS2005 plugin once that becomes
available.  I especially think it could be a strong environment for
Ruby development once the .NET Ruby compiler makes an appearance.
http://www.plas.fit.qut.edu.au/rubynet/
Kev J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 05:19
(Received via mailing list)
>You twice mention 'reading the stack trace' in Java.  That only helps if you
>HAVE a stack trace.  Many bugs don't involve exceptions.
>
Yes logic bugs, where the outcome isn't as expected, but these should be
able to be covered with a unit test.  I admit that in a complex system,
sometimes you get to the state where the only way to test something is
to construct a very large integration test simply to determine what is
wrong - this basically points you towards refactoring, as a system where
nothing can be tested without massive investment in infrastructure is
not capable of being tested properly

> I'm all for unit
>tests, but sometimes a debugger is faster.
>
>
>
I think we'll disagree on this one - which is fine :)

Kev
Curt H. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 05:37
(Received via mailing list)
On 4/17/06, Roy S. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Did you try RadRails[1] out?  I realize that it's built upon Eclipse but
> it does have the benefit of being a stand-alone product that bundles
> everything you need for Ruby and Rails development.
>
> [1]  http://www.radrails.org/

I'll second that. I just started using RadRails a few weeks ago, and I
*am* impressed.

Curt
Jake McArthur (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 06:11
(Received via mailing list)
I find most text editors out there to be abysmal. That said, here are
my opinions on some of the more popular text editors (addressing
Linux and also Mac since that platform has been disregarded so far
and I know some might appreciate the info if they haven't yet tried
the two Mac-specific editors I review).

Cross-Platform CLI:
	vim: Pretty nice, but you have to be willing to learn how to get
around. Has a lot of navigation shortcuts, but there is a lack of
language-sensitive shortcuts.
	emacs: I admit to not having used emacs very much, but it appears
that there are tons of shortcuts that would be very helpful. I
haven't personally seen enough experts zooming through the emacs
interface for it to have gained much of my interest at all.

Linux GUI:
	gedit: Just a typical text editor. Nothing too special in my book.
Lacks the ability to automagically update if the file is altered by
some external process. Not sure about Ruby highlighting; I've mostly
used this for other languages.
	kwrite: Also typical, but has one up over gedit in my book in that
it will update to the latest version of the file written to disk if
it is changed. Very beneficial since I use version management. Like
gedit, I don't recall programming in Ruby in kwrite.

Mac GUI:
	SubEthaEdit: Has most features anybody cares about for a lightweight
text editor. Great syntax highlighting, fast code completion built in
using Cocoa's excellent autocompletion feature, doesn't get in the
way, automatic update to latest version of file. Also, it has a
wonderful peer collaboration feature allowing many people to work on
the same file locally or remotely at the same time with real-time
updates. This is probably nicest for pairs of developers working
together, but larger groups probably would find collaboration in this
way inefficient.
	TextMate: My personal favorite. Way too many features to list here.
Great macros and snippets (all easily programmable), support for tons
of languages (even languages embedded into other languages like the
Ruby inside an rhtml file), and even some excellent project
management and version control system support. The sheer number of
features feels a bit more medium-weight than I am used to in other
editors, but it performs pretty nicely overall.

Obviously, I recommend that anybody who has a Mac check out TextMate
and SubEthaEdit; at least one of the two is sure to satisfy, as they
tackle two extremely different ends of the spectrum.

- Jake McArthur
James M. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 17:31
(Received via mailing list)
I'm confused as to why people think there's some sort of conflict
between
using a debugger and unit testing.  Those tests don't write themselves
bug-free on pass one; having a debugger would be very useful when you're
figuring out why they're failing.

I'd agree that the debugger comes out of the toolbox less frequently,
but
it's still there and it's still useful.

 - James
Michael G. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 17:40
James M. wrote:
> I'm confused as to why people think there's some sort of conflict
> between
> using a debugger and unit testing.  Those tests don't write themselves
> bug-free on pass one; having a debugger would be very useful when you're
> figuring out why they're failing.
>
> I'd agree that the debugger comes out of the toolbox less frequently,
> but
> it's still there and it's still useful.
>
>  - James

Reading this I just realied I haven't fired up a debugger in well over a
year =/
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 18:54
(Received via mailing list)
I've been programming on Unix variants for 20 years and Linux for five
years and I don't even know *how* to use the debugger! The last time I
actually used a debugger of any mind was, if memory serves me correctly,
in the late 1970s on a Xerox OS.

Actually, I don't write unit tests either ... but that is something I
intend to change now that I have a language and environment that
supports them. :)

Michael G. wrote:
>> it's still there and it's still useful.
>>
>>  - James
>>
>
> Reading this I just realied I haven't fired up a debugger in well over a
> year =/
>
>

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

http://linuxcapacityplanning.com
Randy K. (Guest)
on 2006-04-19 00:54
(Received via mailing list)
On Monday 17 April 2006 10:09 pm, Jake McArthur wrote:
> Linux GUI:
> 	gedit: Just a typical text editor. Nothing too special in my book.
> Lacks the ability to automagically update if the file is altered by
> some external process. Not sure about Ruby highlighting; I've mostly
> used this for other languages.
> 	kwrite: Also typical, but has one up over gedit in my book in that
> it will update to the latest version of the file written to disk if
> it is changed. Very beneficial since I use version management. Like
> gedit, I don't recall programming in Ruby in kwrite.

I like nedit.  It does recognize when a file (on disk) is altered by
some
other process and offers to open it.  I'm not sure I'd want it to open
it
automagically.  Has macros, syntax highlighting, can record keystrokes
to
create macros.  Doesn't directly support folding, but I and several
others
have written pseudo-folding macros for various purposes.  (Mine are for
folding TWiki marked up text.)

Randy K.
Javaman59 (Guest)
on 2006-04-19 01:12
Jake McArthur wrote:
> I find most text editors out there to be abysmal. That said, here are
> my opinions on some of the more popular text editors (addressing
> Linux and also Mac since that platform has been disregarded so far
> and I know some might appreciate the info if they haven't yet tried
> the two Mac-specific editors I review).
>
> [...vim, emacs, gedit, kwrite, SubEthaEdit, TextMate...]
>

Thanks Jake, that complements my roundup nicely, and thanks to Mark
(Komodo) and Roy and Curt (RadRails). You've put up some more good info
for anyone looking for a Ruby IDE/Editor.

I have one correction to my first post. I've checked Quanta again, and
found that it does do Ruby syntax highlighting, and basic indentation
"out of the box". It looks to be very strong for HTML, and has a great
KDE look and feel.

To anyone hitting this on a web search, good luck with your choice!

Javaman
John M. Gabriele (Guest)
on 2006-04-19 01:25
(Received via mailing list)
--- Randy K. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

>
> I like nedit.  It does recognize when a file (on disk) is altered by some
> other process and offers to open it.  I'm not sure I'd want it to open it
> automagically.  Has macros, syntax highlighting, can record keystrokes to
> create macros.  Doesn't directly support folding, but I and several others
> have written pseudo-folding macros for various purposes.  (Mine are for
> folding TWiki marked up text.)
>
> Randy K.
>

I like NEdit pretty well. It has almost everything you'd want except for
a
class/method browser, a GUI debugger, and font anti-aliasing (uses
bitmapped X
fonts). Note that it's strictly X11-based. Besides on GNU/Linux, I've
used it
on a Mac (with Apple's X11) and on Windows (with Cygwin's X) and it
worked fine
for me. It's got its own "macro language" that looks pretty simple.

You can find the Ruby syntax highlighting patterns for NEdit here:
http://www.nedit.org/ftp/contrib/highlighting/ruby.pats
(Instructions for how to install them are in that file at the top.)

Looking into FreeRIDE presently.
Joel VanderWerf (Guest)
on 2006-04-19 01:34
(Received via mailing list)
John M. Gabriele wrote:
> You can find the Ruby syntax highlighting patterns for NEdit here:
> http://www.nedit.org/ftp/contrib/highlighting/ruby.pats
> (Instructions for how to install them are in that file at the top.)

See also

http://raa.ruby-lang.org/project/ruby_nedit/

(and I've improved that a bit since then, if you're interested)
Sanju Nath (Guest)
on 2006-04-19 06:56
(Received via mailing list)
BTW, I've been using Kumodo IDE for ruby for the past one month, and it
seems to be an easy, intuitive lightweight interface for ruby.

However, the reason I went there was 'cos I wasn't able to get the
eclipse
plugin debugger to work.

I keep trying to use rubypeople plugin which is a prereq to using the
radrails plugin, but when I try to debug a ruby file, I get this
message:

****************
ruby 1.8.4 debugger listens on port 2107

This application has requested the Runtime to terminate it in an unusual
way.
Please contact the application's support team for more information.
****************

Any hints.  I've reinstalled eclipse, ruby twice now, but no resolution.

Thanks for any hints.
Kevin K. (Guest)
on 2006-05-04 00:32
Sanju Nath wrote:
>... but when I try to debug a ruby file, I get this message:
>
> ****************
> ruby 1.8.4 debugger listens on port 2107
>
The RDT debugger doesn't work with Ruby 1.8.4. It works with 1.8.2.  (I
wasted a half day discovering this.) See
http://rubyeclipse.mktec.com/cgi-bin/trac.py/ticket/81

Some have pointed out that Eclipse can be configured to use one Ruby
interpreter for normal runs and another for debugging runs.  This works
to some extent -- if you're using plain Ruby.  OTOH, if you're using
something like Ruby Tk, then it becomes more challenging (PITA) to get
it to use the right version of Ruby with the right version of the
dependency and the right version of the .so library to do the interface.

I haven't decided whether to rollback to 1.8.2.  If I stay with 1.8.4,
I'll still use Eclipse for most work and I'll use "ruby -rdebug" should
I need to use a debugger.  If debugging gets too hairy, I'll buy a copy
of Komodo or Arachno.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.