I should once more say the intent is not to suggest that Tcl is
better than Ruby… but that the idea of using virtual file systems to
package
software is a good one that gives you a lot of traction, and one that
perhaps us ruby-ites could learn from, rather than struggling in the
wilderness for a few years before it occurs to us.
Looking at ruby2exe about the only thing it seems to be missing to
get there is the idea that it’s internal tarball is really a virtual
filesystem, and could be accessed directly if ruby libraries had virtual
file system support.
The idea of virtual filesystems also provides much more than just
starpack/starkit technologies.
Ron.
Cameron McBride wrote:
On Dec 20, 2007 1:45 PM, Adam S. [email protected] wrote:
Isn’t this exactly what rubyscript2exe does?
http://www.erikveen.dds.nl/rubyscript2exe/
Sounds like it to me, although I don’t know starpacks at all.
I’ve had very good luck with rubyscript2exe. Even used it with C
extensions (like rb-gsl) and it worked on different distributions than
what I “compiled” it on.
Pavel, it’s really straight-forward to use. What are you having
problems with?
Cameron
well, ive been experimenting some more with it. ran into some problems
with the ftools library. but i somehow fixed it. now im just trying to
figure out how this system works. i have a script compiled, but it only
lets me load it through a terminal. so ill just need to paly with it a
bit more, but it seems to be working.
otherwise, for things like jruby and so forth. idunno y, but it seems as
tho my ubuntu isn’t “built” for them. i guess its a problem with my
java, but they wont work. although i would like to try them
does anyone know if Matz plans on making a compiler? While ruby is an
awesome language and extensible, there is time to make a compiler. plus
its C derived.