Forum: Ruby Ruby IDE for Windows 98?

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.
Bart B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 20:21
(Received via mailing list)
Hello,

In a few weeks I am going to teach a class of 16 year old students how
to
program. From scratch. With Ruby. (We have good reasons, I'll explain
them
if you like.) With an IDE. (To get rid of the terminal fears.)
Now the problem is that their school runs Windows 98. We love FreeRIDE,
it's
a good IDE, but it does not run under Windows 98. And that's not good.
Their teacher is not happy about it any more as ruby seems hard on a
console. And that's a pity.
So, which good Ruby IDE works in Windows 98?

The Ruby Eclipse Development tool seems to have lots of buttons and all
kinds of Java related stuff. We want to be clear for students so that's
why
FreeRIDE seemed better...

Do you have any other suggestions? We just want a good IDE that
abstracts
the command prompt in Windows 98, so what do you suggest? We are
starting
to get desperate, we want to teach those students programming the good
way...

Bart
Martin DeMello (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 20:24
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/24/07, Bart B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In a few weeks I am going to teach a class of 16 year old students how to
> program. From scratch. With Ruby. (We have good reasons, I'll explain them
> if you like.) With an IDE. (To get rid of the terminal fears.)

See if Mondrian works in Win98 (not sure, but it's worth a try)

http://www.mondrian-ide.com/

martin
Jeremy McAnally (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 20:25
(Received via mailing list)
SciTe should do what you want I believe; I'd use that because it's
very simple, has syntax highlighting, and will allow you to run from
within it.  I'm nto sure about Win98 support though...

On 1/24/07, Bart B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>


--
My free Ruby e-book:
http://www.humblelittlerubybook.com/book/

My blogs:
http://www.mrneighborly.com/
http://www.rubyinpractice.com/
Detlev Offenbach (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 21:00
(Received via mailing list)
Bart B. wrote:

>
> The Ruby Eclipse Development tool seems to have lots of buttons and all
> kinds of Java related stuff. We want to be clear for students so that's
> why FreeRIDE seemed better...
>
> Do you have any other suggestions? We just want a good IDE that
> abstracts the command prompt in Windows 98, so what do you suggest? We
> are starting to get desperate, we want to teach those students
> programming the good way...
>

You could try eric4 (currently available as snapshots). It is written in
Python but supports Ruby as well (including debugging support).

Detlev
Joel VanderWerf (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 21:14
(Received via mailing list)
Bart B. wrote:
> So, which good Ruby IDE works in Windows 98?

Have you tried RDE?

http://homepage2.nifty.com/sakazuki/rde_en/index.html

The web site doesn't clearly say that it is or is not compatible with
win98.
Bart B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 21:31
(Received via mailing list)
Martin DeMello wrote:

> See if Mondrian works in Win98 (not sure, but it's worth a try)
>
> http://www.mondrian-ide.com/

I'll give it a shot, thanks for the suggestion!

Bart
Olivier (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 23:42
(Received via mailing list)
> With Ruby. (We have good reasons, I'll explain them
> if you like.) With an IDE. (To get rid of the terminal fears.)

I don't see the need for an IDE in your case. When you say that tou want
"To
get rid of the terminal fears", are you talking about the fact of
typing "ruby myprog.rb" in the terminal ?
I think it's essential, for someone who starts learning to program, to
understand the basis of what happens : that source code is not more than
a
simple text file, and that it can be run simply by calling the
interpreter
with this file. The need for an IDE comes later, with the need of
productivity.

So, what you want is just a text editor with syntax highlighting, and a
terminal by its side :)
Sorry, I have never developped with windows, so I cannot counsel you for
what
editor to choose.

I'm sure your student will surpass their fear of terminals ^^
Good luck with the courses !
Bill K. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 23:49
(Received via mailing list)
From: "Olivier" <removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
> with this file. The need for an IDE comes later, with the need of
> productivity.

Indeed.  ~25 years ago when they were teaching us BASIC on
a 40-column display of an APPLE ][ appearing as fuzzy text
on these old TV sets, I don't recall any of us being fearful
that we were dealing with text, without any GUI.

?

:)

Regards,

Bill
Robert D. (Guest)
on 2007-01-24 23:55
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/24/07, Olivier <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> simple text file, and that it can be run simply by calling the interpreter
> Good luck with the courses !
>
> --
> Olivier R.
>
> I tend to agree with Olivier but that is not my business and I am a
*baaad* teacher, I was great support Olivier, was I not ;)? But
Olivier's
advice might be the best way to handle the situation even if you think
it is
a bad didactic approach.

If you are really desperate a live CD with a Linux distribution
containing
RIDE might be your saver, as this is OT please feel free to contact me
off
list, unfortunately I do not know any life distribution containing Free
Ride
but a little research might be helpful.
I had done it myself if I had a little bit more time, hopefully I get
some
more time tomorrow so contact me if you like.

BTW I posted this to the list just in case somebody happened to know
such a
distribution.
'cause this is a Great List ;)

Cheers
Robert
SonOfLilit (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 00:12
(Received via mailing list)
By the way, may I suggest a lesson learned from years of trying to teach
my
sister programming:

Graphics BEFORE number crunching and text processing.

Ideally you will create a small ruby library on top of SDL that does
turtle
graphics or simple shapes and requires just a single 'require 'lib'', no
code to create a window or reference it (since that IS scary) and start
by
letting them draw things.

THEN you will teach them how to crunch numbers so they can draw PRETTY
things (plots like the flower patterns resulting from simple
trigonometric
equations are a favorite, also munching squares and other such things).

THEN you teach them how to program text adventure games.

THEN you show them how to use the real SDL and also keyboard input from
it
so they can create Pong, and then you just let them play and give some
advice until the end of the year, pushing but only guiding, not MAKING
them
do any specific thing.

Just some tips from experience. Some of it is wrong (especially where
showing them the full SDL bindings, also there's nothing on OO in my
plan,
or on ruby in particular as opposed to "Generic simple language").

Anyone should feel free to comment or bash my ideas.

Aur S.
Olivier (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 01:21
(Received via mailing list)
> I tend to agree with Olivier but that is not my business and I am a
> *baaad* teacher, I was great support Olivier, was I not ;)?

Sure ! As a bad student, I'm glad to be supported by a bad teacher :)
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 05:04
(Received via mailing list)
Bill K. wrote:
>> to understand the basis of what happens : that source code is not
>> more than a simple text file, and that it can be run simply by
>> calling the interpreter with this file. The need for an IDE comes
>> later, with the need of productivity.
>
> Indeed.  ~25 years ago when they were teaching us BASIC on
> a 40-column display of an APPLE ][ appearing as fuzzy text on these
> old TV sets, I don't recall any of us being fearful
> that we were dealing with text, without any GUI.
But a *lot* of us who worked with "real computers" refused to have
anything to do with a 40-column screen. Hell, most of the folks who
actually *did* stuff with their Altairs had an ADM-3. :) That was one of
the truly joyful things about the Commodore 64 -- you could buy a real
color monitor for a reasonable price and not have to mess with RF
modulators, etc..

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Reid T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 05:45
(Received via mailing list)
> more time tomorrow so contact me if you like.
>
> BTW I posted this to the list just in case somebody happened to know
> such a
> distribution.
> 'cause this is a Great List ;)
>
> Cheers
> Robert
>
>
http://www.ibiblio.org/onebase/onebaselinux.com/Ab...

zenlive ( site appears to be down for maint tonight ). I seem to recall
it has dev tools,, not sure which.

getting a multisession cdrom of  puppy, putting whatever tools you need
on it, then making copies....
     http://www.puppylinux.org/user/viewpage.php?page_id=1

damn small linux can download ruby via a couple of clicks ( internet
connection required though )
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

if the host boxes are powerful && have enough RAM knoppix might viable
http://www.knoppix.org/  there should be a list somewhere on the site
listing contents of the cdrom

dyne:II
http://dev.dynebolic.org/trac.cgi/wiki/SourcePackages

google on variants of
livecd live cd with development tools

there are more ...
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 05:59
(Received via mailing list)
Reid T. wrote:
>> more time tomorrow so contact me if you like.
>>
>> BTW I posted this to the list just in case somebody happened to know
>> such a
>> distribution.
>> 'cause this is a Great List ;)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Robert
>>
>>
It's pretty easy to make custom live CDs these days, *if* you have
enough RAM and disk space. I actually think there's a Rails LiveCD, and
I'm sure there's a Rails "Virtual Appliance" -- a VMware virtual machine
you can boot up in the free player or server.

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Martin DeMello (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 10:05
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/25/07, SonOfLilit <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> By the way, may I suggest a lesson learned from years of trying to teach my
> sister programming:
>
> Graphics BEFORE number crunching and text processing.

When I taught my brother to program, I started with text i/o. He had
great fun writing little quiz programs (ask a question, present a few
choices, wait for an answer, repeat), unit conversion programs, etc.
Text is more interactive than graphics that way.

martin
SonOfLilit (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 11:50
(Received via mailing list)
I also started with text.

Wrote text games and other fun stuff.

But the REAL joy came when we discovered the BASIC LINE command.

And with my sister, which was/is less of a gekk pre-programming-lessons,
I
could never get her interested in writing text games and fun things
involving text (my generation of programmers will ALLWAYS remember the
famous rocket ascii animation).

When I taught her "paper logo" (I just took a piece of paper and taught
her
LOGO commands, drawing them on the paper when executing) she got really
interested and not only did what I asked her to but thought a lot
forward
(she proposed variables and named procedures herself, after only about
half
an hour of polygon drawing).

Graphics are, in my opinion, the most "fun" kind of artistic
programming,
and the one where nice results are the simplest to get (and also, one
where
advanced programming yields even better results, see for example
fractals or
the amazing demos a pascal teacher I had showed us, with a 3D flaming
ball
or a waving flag...).

Aur S.
Richard C. (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 12:04
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/24/07, Bart B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> So, which good Ruby IDE works in Windows 98?

Well there is really no IDE for Ruby on Windows, at best
you can get a text-editor-alike that runs code from within it
and captures its output, like SCITE. For windows stuff, I really
like the clean-ness of Notepad++, but I can't get it to execute
Ruby code from within the editor.

RoRed seems nice and simple for Rails stuff, don't know whether
all that Rails stuff gets in the way of it being a simple Ruby
editor, haven't tried it.

Really though, for learning purposes, SCITE is your man.
FreeRIDE seems like such a mess at the moment, and crashes
lots.

As for your Win 98 requirement ... well thats tough.
Ray Vernagus (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 14:09
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/24/07, Bart B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> console. And that's a pity.
> So, which good Ruby IDE works in Windows 98?
>

Crimson Editor is a great, free, lightweight editor that supports Ruby.
According to the system requirements posted on its page, it runs on
Win95.

http://www.crimsoneditor.com/english/

Best wishes to your class and glad to hear that you're choosing Ruby!
--Ray
(Guest)
on 2007-01-25 15:45
(Received via mailing list)
Komodo by ActiiveState does everything you want plus intellisense.
Works on Windows 98 and one license lets you install a copy on Mac,
Windows, and Linux.  It will cost you $29 per student.


.
(Guest)
on 2007-01-25 15:56
(Received via mailing list)
Oooh, re Komodo.  Sorry.  ActiveState's product placement has
completely changed since I bought 3.5.  4.0 is now two products, Komodo
Edit (free) and Komodo IDE ($245).  Yikes.  I cannot vouch for the IDE
at this price.  Unless they've greatly revamped and improved the
product then I would probably not buy it at that price.  That said,
version 3.5 was a bargain at $29.

Bob
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-25 17:19
(Received via mailing list)
removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:
> Oooh, re Komodo.  Sorry.  ActiveState's product placement has
> completely changed since I bought 3.5.  4.0 is now two products, Komodo
> Edit (free) and Komodo IDE ($245).  Yikes.  I cannot vouch for the IDE
> at this price.  Unless they've greatly revamped and improved the
> product then I would probably not buy it at that price.  That said,
> version 3.5 was a bargain at $29.
>
> Bob
>
It looks like the free Komodo Editor will do everything the OP needs.
Given that Curt just dropped FreeRide from the One-Click installer, this
might be their best shot, assuming the Komodo Editor will run on Windows
98. Still, I wonder how much RAM they have in their machines if they're
stuck on Windows 98, and whether even if these things "execute", what
their performance will be like?
>> console. And that's a pity.
>>
>> Bart
>>
>
>
>
>


--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
Gregory B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 05:04
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/25/07, SonOfLilit <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

> Graphics are, in my opinion, the most "fun" kind of artistic programming,
> and the one where nice results are the simplest to get (and also, one where
> advanced programming yields even better results, see for example fractals or
> the amazing demos a pascal teacher I had showed us, with a 3D flaming ball
> or a waving flag...).

I have to admit, I started with the BASIC drawing commands on a
Commodore Plus/4 :)
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 05:48
(Received via mailing list)
> > Graphics are, in my opinion, the most "fun" kind of artistic programming,
> > and the one where nice results are the simplest to get (and also, one where
> > advanced programming yields even better results, see for example fractals or
> > the amazing demos a pascal teacher I had showed us, with a 3D flaming ball
> > or a waving flag...).
>
> I have to admit, I started with the BASIC drawing commands on a
> Commodore Plus/4 :)

Personally, if I was going to teach somebody programming today, I'd
use either Lego Mindstorms, or one of those "Bobot" kits. (Commands in
BASIC delivered via serial cable.)
Gregory B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 06:51
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/27/07, Giles B. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> use either Lego Mindstorms, or one of those "Bobot" kits. (Commands in
> BASIC delivered via serial cable.)

Mindstorms is a decent approach because you could move from graphical
programming to something like nqc
Matt L. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 06:57
(Received via mailing list)
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Gregory B. wrote:

> Mindstorms is a decent approach because you could move from graphical
> programming to something like nqc

Or Forth.

-- Matt
It's not what I know that counts.
It's what I can remember in time to use.
Gregory B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 07:03
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/27/07, Matt L. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Gregory B. wrote:
>
> > Mindstorms is a decent approach because you could move from graphical
> > programming to something like nqc
>
> Or Forth.

Yeah, there are a whole host of languages it supports... i think java
is another one.

There is even some Ruby code that lets you use DRb, though I've never
tried it:
http://rubyforge.org/projects/lego-mindstorms/
Julian T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 11:41
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 24, 2007, at 11:12 PM, SonOfLilit wrote:

> Ideally you will create a small ruby library on top of SDL that
> does turtle
> graphics or simple shapes and requires just a single 'require
> 'lib'', no
> code to create a window or reference it (since that IS scary) and
> start by
> letting them draw things.

Which, by occasion, is going to be called Squeak (and will run
without Ruby in the first place)
Robert D. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 12:59
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/28/07, Julian T. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > letting them draw things.
>
> Which, by occasion, is going to be called Squeak (and will run
> without Ruby in the first place)


I am afraid that name is already taken :( http://squeak.org/

Robert

--
Julian T. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 13:16
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 28, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Robert D. wrote:

> I am afraid that name is already taken :( http://squeak.org/
Amazing :-)

> --
> "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
> - Alan Kay

This one is spot on in the context.
Robert D. (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 13:43
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/28/07, Julian T. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Robert D. wrote:
>
> > I am afraid that name is already taken :( http://squeak.org/
> Amazing :-)


But I was reading that carefully I suspected that you *might* talk about
that Squeak, just failed to see a hint, strange :)!

Yeah Squeak is definitely a candidate for teaching, especially with,
wossaname etoys.
And I guess Smalltalk is a great first language (only that you might
hate
the second!)
Cheers
Robert

> --
> > "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
> > - Alan Kay
>
> This one is spot on in the context.


Don't make me blush ;)

--
SonOfLilit (Guest)
on 2007-01-28 14:26
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/28/07, Julian T. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > letting them draw things.
>
> Which, by occasion, is going to be called Squeak (and will run
> without Ruby in the first place)
>

Not if you are me.

Etoys gives bad ahbits and I haven't managed to do graphics in
Smalltalk/Squeak to this day.

After reading about ST, playing with Squeak, marvelling at the
browseability
of it all and the elegant simple language I've decided to learn how to
use
it. "Finally, a language well-suited for GUI and graphics programming",
I
thought to myself.

At the time I promised the manager of a kindergarten for underdeveloped
children that I'll code software to replace the horrible software they
used
to teach the children about action-reaction (that if they do something
it
affects the world around them) that actually worked against it's cause.

The program was supposed to be very simple: A full screen display of a
white
canvas that can be painted on with a "mouse" (they had touch screens)
and
/when/ painted on,  cycles colors of a circle around the mouse position
(combination of very simple screensaver-like graphics tricks with mouse
input. Piece of cake, even in C which is very ill-suited for GUI
programming).

I chose Squeak for three reasons:

1) Deploying couldn't be easier
2) Smalltalk is supposed to be fitted perfectly to this kind of problem
3) I wanted to learn Smalltalk

After a week of trying to learn from the library, trying to learn from
the
Squeak Paint program, trying to find good online tutorials, trying to do
it
with MVC and Morphic - well, I gave up without having even a canvas I
can
paint on with a photoshop-pencil-like tool.

So it's not something I'd teach 16 year olds.

I'd rather teach things that if I were them, I'd be able to figure out
myself and not need the teacher for.

I figured out how to use Ruby/SDL, when I needed it, in less than half
an
hour.

I figured out how to use Ruby, when I decided to, the moment I tried
(no,
seriously!).

That says good things about Ruby as a programming language to teach 16
year
old-s.

Currently I'm waiting for the contact details of that kindergarten to
reach
me (someone is supposed to give them to me but she insists on waiting
for a
certain event before she passes that email on, having to do with the
rest of
the group which I visited the place as part of). The moment I will, I'll
talk details with them and guess I could deliver a Ruby/SDL
implementation
within a day.


Aur S.

BTW I went through writing all this just because I hoped it'd get
someone to
shout "idiot! Why didn't you do <this> or use <that> learning
resource?!" at
me, so if you know what this and that are, please drop a line.
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-29 01:07
(Received via mailing list)
> After a week of trying to learn from the library, trying to learn
> from the Squeak Paint program, trying to find good online
> tutorials, trying to do it with MVC and Morphic - well, I gave
> up without having even a canvas I can paint on with a
> photoshop-pencil-like tool.

I **love** Seaside, the Squeak S. web app framework, but the
documentation is definitely the downside. Just finding good info on
the language's syntax took me some time. I tried and failed six months
ago with Cincom VisualWorks Smalltalk, too. It even took me a while to
find nice people in the Smalltalk community; the first people I asked
cursed me for not knowing Smalltalk to begin with, and then had
hysterical fits when I made a joke about it being a dead language.

Once I got it up and running, though, I fell in love with it. It's
pretty awesome. I recorded a screencast about Seaside this morning,
probably going to post and blog it tonight.
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky (Guest)
on 2007-01-29 01:21
(Received via mailing list)
Giles B. wrote:
> find nice people in the Smalltalk community; the first people I asked
> cursed me for not knowing Smalltalk to begin with, and then had
> hysterical fits when I made a joke about it being a dead language.
>
> Once I got it up and running, though, I fell in love with it. It's
> pretty awesome. I recorded a screencast about Seaside this morning,
> probably going to post and blog it tonight.
>
There are two books on Squeak, both of which have CD-ROMs including
(older) implementations. I have both of them. Unfortunately, they're
very much written towards the "extreme programming" philosophy, which I
find distasteful in many, though not all, respects. And, like the other
poster, I found the user interface so orthogonal to everything I've
learned and integrated into muscle memory that Squeak was simply
unusable. And IIRC the "open software" people have yet to recognize the
Squeak license as "free as in freedom". So -- three strikes and you're
out! :)

Now, if you want to do animation, you can do it in Squeak. If you want
to do a web app framework, you can do it in Squeak. If you want to do
algorithmic composition and synthesis, you can do it in Squeak. But why
bother when there's Blender, Rails, and Planet CCRMA?

--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits fire.
SonOfLilit (Guest)
on 2007-01-29 02:36
(Received via mailing list)
So... do you have pointers on Graphics programming in Squeak?
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.