Forum: Ruby GUI IDE for Ruby

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.
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:25
(Received via mailing list)
Hi all,
is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
info is crucial to me.

Thank you for your answers.
slunky (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
_/At 2005-11-29, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote\_
> is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
> developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
> info is crucial to me.

Tony, the only IDE for Ruby that I'm aware of is in KDevelop. It's part
of the KDE package which most-likely is available to your distro... I
can't imagine why it wouldn't be. I don't know if it can run under
another WM, but I can check if you'd like.
Joe Van D. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/28/05, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Hi all,
> is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
> developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
> info is crucial to me.

Why do you need an IDE to develop a cross-platform GUI application?
slunky (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Komodo also has a Ruby IDE, you can also check out www.ruby-ide.com for
another one. I've only ever used KDevelop out of the three. Ruby doesn't
really need an IDE in my opinion, but whatever floats your boat.
Kyle H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Komodo 3.5 from ActiveState. Windows. Linux. OSX.

http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/?tn=1

Kyle H.
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Nshbrown N. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
RadRails is meant for Rails development, but is great as even strictly a
Ruby IDE. With their latest version, it has quite a few features worth
checking out.

www.radrails.org

Warmest regards,
Nathan.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Nathaniel S. H. Brown                 Toll Free 1.877.4.INIMIT
Inimit Innovations                        Phone   604.724.6624
www.inimit.com                              Fax   604.444.9942
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
slunky wrote:
> Ruby doesn't
> really need an IDE in my opinion, but whatever floats your boat.

Why do you think that it doesn't need an IDE?
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Joe Van D. wrote:
> Why do you need an IDE to develop a cross-platform GUI application?

I understand that you can write a complex graphical interface based
application with pure ruby code, but it's quite a pain in the neck (you
must tell by code the coordinate of each single widget and so on).
That's also in part the reason why many people spend tons of cash on
Visual Studio: you design the interface, and then you write the code to
make it do something useful. Isn't it?
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Nathaniel S. H. Brown wrote:
> RadRails is meant for Rails development, but is great as even strictly a
> Ruby IDE. With their latest version, it has quite a few features worth
> checking out.
>
> www.radrails.org
>
> Warmest regards,
> Nathan.

Nathan,
thanks for this advice. It looks so promising. How it comes that
everything related somehow to rails becomes "gold" ?! :-)
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Kyle H. wrote:
> Komodo 3.5 from ActiveState. Windows. Linux. OSX.
>
> http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/?tn=1

Thanks Kyle. It looks nice but it's pricey.
Gregory B. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/28/05, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> slunky wrote:
> > Ruby doesn't
> > really need an IDE in my opinion, but whatever floats your boat.
>
> Why do you think that it doesn't need an IDE?

Many rubyists do not use IDEs because there isn't a big need for the
'tools' IDE's generally offer.   You're not compiling anything or
'building' applications so to speak, so in general, a set of rdoc, ri,
irb, rake, and rubygems are all you need.

I personally use vim / gvim with vim-ruby installed on OS X, Windows,
Debian/Ubuntu/Gentoo Linux, and FreeBSD.

Takes care of all my needs :)

But if you're looking for a GUI designer, you can actually use the QT
Designer.  This is explained in the Pragmatic Programmer's book on
Ruby QT

My 2 minute long experience with QT designer leads me to think if I'm
going to code QT at all, I'm going to do it by hand.

There is also a VisualStudio integration bridge out there somewhere,
though I have NO CLUE at all how that works.

For GUI's I generally use Tk or build a Rails application.   I've also
build some using VisualStudio and C# and just piped in data from ruby
scripts...

You can also build very capable CLIs with HighLIne, if you are looking
for something that just works and is easy to write.
Joe Van D. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/28/05, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Joe Van D. wrote:
> > Why do you need an IDE to develop a cross-platform GUI application?
>
> I understand that you can write a complex graphical interface based
> application with pure ruby code, but it's quite a pain in the neck (you
> must tell by code the coordinate of each single widget and so on).
> That's also in part the reason why many people spend tons of cash on
> Visual Studio: you design the interface, and then you write the code to
> make it do something useful. Isn't it?

With Gtk and Tk, you don't use coordinates.  You pack widgets into
containers and pack those containers into windows.

It's not terribly difficult, and it's a better approach than
pixel-oriented coordinate systems.
tony (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Joe Van D. wrote:
> With Gtk and Tk, you don't use coordinates.  You pack widgets into
> containers and pack those containers into windows.
>
> It's not terribly difficult, and it's a better approach than
> pixel-oriented coordinate systems.

Interesting point. I'll look into Tk.
Tsume (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On Tuesday 29 November 2005 09:17 am, tony wrote:
> Hi all,
> is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
> developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
> info is crucial to me.
>
> Thank you for your answers.

The most complete toolkit with available IDE would be
qtruby (qt4 release nears, qt3 is stable). Use kdevelop with this,
designer
app of qt embeds in kdevelop, making code and gui design easy because
they
both hook together. Code generation or loading the ui files are
available.

the second most complete toolkit with just an okay IDE would be
ruby-gnome2 (available in just ruby-gtk2, see sourceforge page)
with glade, you just load the glade generated files.

Hope this helps.. Qt is the most stable and advanced, depending on if
you have
the guts to go GPL. If not, use ruby-gnome2

Tsume
Damphyr (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
tony wrote:
> Joe Van D. wrote:
>
>> With Gtk and Tk, you don't use coordinates.  You pack widgets into
>> containers and pack those containers into windows.
>>
>> It's not terribly difficult, and it's a better approach than
>> pixel-oriented coordinate systems.
>
>
> Interesting point. I'll look into Tk.
This is actually a point that is valid with almost all widget systems
*except* the one  Microsoft uses.
V.-

--
http://www.braveworld.net/riva
Joe Van D. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/29/05, Damphyr <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > Interesting point. I'll look into Tk.
> This is actually a point that is valid with almost all widget systems
> *except* the one  Microsoft uses.

I'm not familiar with Microsoft's way of laying out GUIs.  Do they use
pixel-based coordinate systems?

Is that why some dialogs and applications look weird if I use a bigger
font?

How do they deal with internationalization of applications?
Damphyr (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Joe Van D. wrote:
>>>> It's not terribly difficult, and it's a better approach than
> use pixel-based coordinate systems?
0,0 - width,height (or is it height,width? I can never remember).
It makes it very easy to build a GUI Builder (I guess that's why VS has
the best GUI designing facility there is) but is a bitch to control when
you want to have complex resizing and layout.
> Is that why some dialogs and applications look weird if I use a
> bigger font?
Bummer isn't? It can be done, but it was not worth the time (can'T speak
for Windows Forms though)
> How do they deal with internationalization of applications?
The famous .rc files and long tables of constants :)
I've given up on C++ MFC GUIs a long time ago and have not had any
contact with C#/.NET Forms.
Switched to Fox and found what I needed for the admitedly minimal needs
outside work (and since I work on embedded systems nobody forces me to
write GUIs :) ). Helps that I can use it through Ruby too :)
V.-
--
http://www.braveworld.net/riva
tony summerfelt (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
tony wrote on 11/28/2005 8:07 PM:

>> Komodo 3.5 from ActiveState. Windows. Linux. OSX.

> Thanks Kyle. It looks nice but it's pricey.

the professional version is. the personal version seems to have an
"average" shareware type price...
Greg K. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Tsume wrote:

> Hope this helps.. Qt is the most stable and advanced, depending on if you have
> the guts to go GPL. If not, use ruby-gnome2
>
>
> Tsume

Another alternative worthy of note is Widestudio (www.widestudio.org).
I have checked it out to a certain degree and it appears to be a good
cross-platform solution. Windows, Mac, Linux, Linux Embedded, Solaris,
Windows CE/Pocket PC, etc. At first glance it doesn't appear to be as
appealing widget-wise as Qt or GTK but it is portable.
Jeff W. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Arachno Ruby is quite good also.  It's still a work in progress but I
love
it's debugger.

j.

On 11/29/05, gregarican <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Tsume
>
> Another alternative worthy of note is Widestudio (www.widestudio.org).
> I have checked it out to a certain degree and it appears to be a good
> cross-platform solution. Windows, Mac, Linux, Linux Embedded, Solaris,
> Windows CE/Pocket PC, etc. At first glance it doesn't appear to be as
> appealing widget-wise as Qt or GTK but it is portable.
>
>
>


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

Jeff W.
Curt H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/28/05, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
> developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
> info is crucial to me.


Besides Komodo and RadRails that were previsouly mentions, there is
ArachnoRuby, RDT extensions for Eclipse, FreeRIDE, JEdit, and I'm sure
there's more I've left out:

  http://www.ruby-ide.com/ruby/ruby_ide_and_ruby_editor.php
  http://rubyeclipse.sourceforge.net/
  http://freeride.rubyforge.org/
  http://jedit.org/ruby/

Curt
Tsume (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 12:37 am, gregarican wrote:
> >
> Windows CE/Pocket PC, etc. At first glance it doesn't appear to be as
> appealing widget-wise as Qt or GTK but it is portable.

Most definitely, it does one thing right, "gets the job done" Which is
what
programming is about, not overzealous tactics, design, etc. There are
pros
and cons to each of the toolkits mentioned. Just a programmers job to
try
them all out to see for self.

Tsume
Ville Mattila (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Jeff W. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> writes:

> ------=_Part_9257_28799573.1133278786907
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> Arachno Ruby is quite good also.  It's still a work in progress but I love
> it's debugger.

 Another vote for Arachno Ruby (http://www.rubyide.com)

 - Ville
snacktime (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/28/05, tony <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Hi all,
> is there a GUI IDE for Ruby? I have to decide on Ruby orJava to start
> developing crossplatform gui applications (developed on Linux) and this
> info is crucial to me.
>
> Thank you for your answers.
>
>
I've been looking at my options in this area also.  So far wxruby and
visualwx are at the top of my list.  wxruby seems pretty stable even
though it's considered beta.  visualwx is alpha quality but seems to
work ok.  The two combined are much simpler to configure and use then
anything else I have found.  Actually I haven't found any other visual
IDE that runs on windows and uses a library that has native widgets.
If it exists I'd love to find it.  fxruby looks like a close second
but frankly it's widgets are ugly on windows.

Chris
Tsume (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 07:49 am, snacktime wrote:
> though it's considered beta.  visualwx is alpha quality but seems to
> work ok.  The two combined are much simpler to configure and use then
> anything else I have found.  Actually I haven't found any other visual
> IDE that runs on windows and uses a library that has native widgets.
> If it exists I'd love to find it.  fxruby looks like a close second
> but frankly it's widgets are ugly on windows.
>
> Chris

wxruby2 is very incomplete, wxruby doesn't work too well... sorry to
burst the
enjoyment bubble.

You'll find these toolkits to work the best, and are most complete..

qtruby3 (no windows though) qtruby4 will but dont count on it soon.
ruby-gnome2(also ruby-gtk2) are the most complete.

qtruby has kdevelop possibilities
ruby-gtk2 has glade. might not be as powerful as designer for Qt, but
the
application is decent to work with.

fxruby is just okay, no designer, plus it is unstable if you pass
variables to
it which you aren't supposed to, leading in segfaults of ruby.

Tsume
snacktime (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/29/05, Tsume <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > visualwx are at the top of my list.  wxruby seems pretty stable even
> enjoyment bubble.
If it works well enough for the application at hand and has the
features needed, then whether it's 'incomplete' as a whole or has
problems in some areas really isn't all that important.

What matters is out of all the choices you have, what's the best
solution?   In my case I need native widgets, I don't want to spend
hundreds of dollars on an IDE, and I need to create closed source
programs (bye bye Qt Designer).  There really isn't much out there
given my requirements.   At the same time i don't need that many
features,  and wxruby seems to work just fine so far.  That said, if I
run into issues with xwruby I might end up using wxperl or wxpython.
Just as long as I don't have to invest hundreds into MS dev tools
and can use a language I already know I really don't care that much.

Chris
graham (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Damphyr wrote:
>> Interesting point. I'll look into Tk.
> This is actually a point that is valid with almost all widget systems
> *except* the one  Microsoft uses.
... and that could be the reason why there are many more apps in VB than
almost anything else. VB (and its Visual Studio counterparts) allow you
put something together quickly. All this messing about with layout
managers and graph paper is a PITA..
(GUI newbie with a VB background :)
Graham
graham (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
>> Arachno Ruby is quite good also.  It's still a work in progress but I love
>> it's debugger.
>
>  Another vote for Arachno Ruby (http://www.rubyide.com)
Ditto - as you say - work in progress, but still very usable as is.
(doesn't help with the GUI part though - it has no GUI tools in it as
yet)

Graham
Jonas H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
graham wrote:
> Graham
i prefer open source, best GPL style, software.
makes me more independent.
Jeffrey S. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
graham wrote:
> managers and graph paper is a PITA..
> (GUI newbie with a VB background :)


PITA for a lazy developer, maybe.  As a GUI user, I hate text fields
that don't grow as I widen the frames that contain them.  It's not a
solution to try preventing the using from resizing the dialog, either.
unknown (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Quoting graham <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>:

> All this messing about with layout managers and graph paper is a
> PITA..

Why graph paper?  I mean, as far as the basic layout stuff goes with
Gtk, you've got boxes where you stack things vertically, boxes where
you stack them horizontally, and tables where you put things in
rows/columns.

As long as you know that e.g. you want widget A to go above widget
B, it Just Works(tm).  Everything finds its own natural size.  I
can usually do a decent job coding a layout-based dialog without
bothering to draw anything.

Contrast with pixel-position layouts, where you've got to tweak the
exact size, and painstakingly move everything around by hand.  If
you didn't have a GUI designer handy, that really would require
graph paper.  And a lot of erasers.

-mental
Shot - Piotr S. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Hello.

Jonas H.:

> graham wrote:

>>> Another vote for Arachno Ruby (http://www.rubyide.com)

>> Ditto - as you say - work in progress, but still very usable as is.

> i prefer open source, best GPL style, software.
> makes me more independent.

Just out of curiosity - what's in GPL that benefits you *as
a user* in contrast to other Open Source licenses (say, BSD)?

Cheers,
-- Shot, who's definitely in the GPL camp as a developer,
   but doesn't see much difference for the users...
Kevin B. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
On Wednesday 30 November 2005 14:27, Shot - Piotr S. wrote:
>
> Just out of curiosity - what's in GPL that benefits you *as
> a user* in contrast to other Open Source licenses (say, BSD)?

Open source advocates don't whine at you for using software that is
licensed
under it.
Jonas H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Shot - Piotr S. wrote:
>
>>>Ditto - as you say - work in progress, but still very usable as is.
>
>
>>i prefer open source, best GPL style, software.
>>makes me more independent.
>
>
> Just out of curiosity - what's in GPL that benefits you *as
> a user* in contrast to other Open Source licenses (say, BSD)?

It is more likely that I won't get into a situtation where code goes
closed, means it is used in closed source products or is used to build
close source products.

Take, for example NeoOffice (OO Fork for OS X), if this was released
under a more liberal and less free liscense soon there would be
commercial closed source solutions that offer "benefits" of this or that
kind.

and some time later i see the original open source project die. (less
users, less need, less money support)

i perfer bsd when it is about very basic things that can be
reimplemented/created fast.
Josef 'Jupp' SCHUGT (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
Hi!

At Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:56:45 +0900, Joe Van D. wrote:
> I'm not familiar with Microsoft's way of laying out GUIs. Do they
> use pixel-based coordinate systems?
>
> Is that why some dialogs and applications look weird if I use a
> bigger font?
>
> How do they deal with internationalization of applications?

To put it that way: If Microsoft were some army the following incident
could occur: "Sir, this German translation does not fit into the
windows" - "A translation always fits where the US text fits." - "But
Sir..." - "It DOES fit!" - "Well, yes ..." - "PERIOD!" - "Yes, Sir!"

German is a good example because most of its terms are longer than the
original ones.

Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
Jakub H. (Guest)
on 2005-12-11 18:27
(Received via mailing list)
>
It may seem funny, but Microsoft Czech Republic for one _is_ one hell of
an army. I _did_ some translations for them. 8-) Fortunately, Windows
don't force you to do it in your apps... ;-)

Jakub
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.