Executables


#1

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?
Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


#2

I like the switch option best. We also need to add a -e option to pass
some of the specs.

JD

From: Tomas M.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:12 PM
To: IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Executables

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?
Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


#3

I like second option too. But why --dlr? Why not --repl?


Oleg

From: Jim D.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:16 PM
To: Tomas M.; IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like the switch option best. We also need to add a -e option to pass
some of the specs.

JD

From: Tomas M.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:12 PM
To: IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Executables

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?
Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


#4

Could be --repl.

From: Oleg T.
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:35 PM
To: Jim D.; Tomas M.; IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like second option too. But why --dlr? Why not --repl?


Oleg

From: Jim D.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:16 PM
To: Tomas M.; IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like the switch option best. We also need to add a -e option to pass
some of the specs.

JD

From: Tomas M.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:12 PM
To: IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Executables

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?
Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


#5

Is there a particular reason we need the executable to do the REPL
itself?
ir.exe runs irb just fine, and is actually what I’ve been using lately
(there’s a few annoyances but nothing earth shattering)

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Tomas M. <


#6

We need DLR REPL for testing interop.

Tomas

From: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
[mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid] On Behalf Of Michael
Letterle
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:50 PM
To: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Executables

Is there a particular reason we need the executable to do the REPL
itself? ir.exe runs irb just fine, and is actually what I’ve been using
lately (there’s a few annoyances but nothing earth shattering)
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Tomas M.
<removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:

Could be --repl.

From: Oleg T.
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:35 PM
To: Jim D.; Tomas M.; IronRuby Team

Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like second option too. But why --dlr? Why not --repl?

Oleg

From: Jim D.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:16 PM
To: Tomas M.; IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like the switch option best. We also need to add a -e option to pass
some of the specs.

JD

From: Tomas M.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:12 PM
To: IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Executables

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?

Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


#7

We don’t want our interop tests to be testing irb.rb though. :slight_smile:

From: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
[mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid] On Behalf Of Michael
Letterle
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 6:18 PM
To: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Executables

? interop works through IRB just as well…

C:>ir ruby\bin\irb
irb(main):001:0> require ‘mscorlib’
=> true
irb(main):002:0> require ‘System.Windows.Forms,
Version=2.0.0.0http://2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral,
PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089’
=> true
irb(main):003:0> f = System::Windows::Forms::Form.new
=> #System::Windows::Forms::Form:0x00001b8
irb(main):004:0> i = f.show_dialog
=> #System::Windows::Forms::DialogResult:0x00001ea

Am I missing something?

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Tomas M.
<removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:

We need DLR REPL for testing interop.

Tomas

From:
removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
[mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid]
On Behalf Of Michael L.
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:50 PM
To: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Executables

Is there a particular reason we need the executable to do the REPL
itself? ir.exe runs irb just fine, and is actually what I’ve been using
lately (there’s a few annoyances but nothing earth shattering)

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Tomas M.
<removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid>
wrote:

Could be --repl.

From: Oleg T.
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 5:35 PM
To: Jim D.; Tomas M.; IronRuby Team

Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like second option too. But why --dlr? Why not --repl?

Oleg

From: Jim D.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:16 PM
To: Tomas M.; IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: RE: Executables

I like the switch option best. We also need to add a -e option to pass
some of the specs.

JD

From: Tomas M.
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:12 PM
To: IronRuby Team
Cc: removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Executables

Today we have ir.exe that combines functionality of ruby.exe and a
command line REPL. Shouldn’t we have also iruby.exe that mimics ruby.exe
(ie. if no file is given it reads input from standard input)?

Some specs expects that behavior (they start a new process ruby.exe and
write to its input stream).

Another option would be to have a single executable ir.exe that behaves
like ruby.exe and e.g. --dlr switch that makes it run DLR REPL loop.

Tomas


Ironruby-core mailing list
removed_email_address@domain.invalidmailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core


Michael L.
[Polymath Prokrammer]
http://blog.prokrams.com


#8

? interop works through IRB just as well…

C:>ir ruby\bin\irb
irb(main):001:0> require ‘mscorlib’
=> true
irb(main):002:0> require ‘System.Windows.Forms, Version=2.0.0.0,
Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089’
=> true
irb(main):003:0> f = System::Windows::Forms::Form.new
=> #System::Windows::Forms::Form:0x00001b8
irb(main):004:0> i = f.show_dialog
=> #System::Windows::Forms::DialogResult:0x00001ea

Am I missing something?

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Tomas M. <


#9

If people are going to be using irb, you might :wink:

Anyway, I suppose that makes sense