# Ruby Libraries ==\> IronRuby **URL:** \ **Category:** IronRuby\ **Created:** [December 17, 2009, 6:15pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-libraries-ironruby/180337 "2009-12-17T18:15:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 6:15pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-libraries-ironruby/180337/1 "2009-12-17T18:15:01Z")
Tomas’s message below seems to reflect what I’ve been thinking lately. Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I’m supposing that IR performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else’s work). Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, atm, I’m just wondering “out loud.” Cheers! Ryan R. Email: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid LinkedIn: [http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley) Blog: [http://wizardsofsmart.net/](http://wizardsofsmart.net/) Twitter: @panesofglass Website: [http://panesofglass.org/](http://panesofglass.org/) On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas M. \< ---
**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 7:55pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-libraries-ironruby/180337/2 "2009-12-17T19:55:07Z")
For the rest of our ~10% missing Ruby built-in/library support, using code from Rubinius could possibly make more things work. I’d try this out for a library you care about that isn’t implemented, see if you can get all the specs passing for that, and report back. =) However, are you referring to “C-library ports to Ruby” that are outside the Ruby stdlib (as in, 3rd party libs, gems, etc)? I don’t know of many of those existing, but probably because I haven’t been looking, but again if they do exist their doesn’t seem like anything wrong with trying to get them working on IronRuby for more 3rd party library support. The only issues I see is if they somehow use Rubinius only features. Another thing to be aware of is licensing; the IronRuby codebase is partitioned into three licenses, based on where we got the code from: Ms-Pl, Ruby license, and Creative Commons. If the intention is to commit these Ruby libraries into IronRuby to fill out our support, then we just need to be mindful of what license the incoming code. ~Jimmy From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)] On Behalf Of Ryan R. Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:00 AM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==\> IronRuby Tomas’s message below seems to reflect what I’ve been thinking lately. Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I’m supposing that IR performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else’s work). Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, atm, I’m just wondering “out loud.” Cheers! Ryan R. Email: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) LinkedIn: [http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley) Blog: [http://wizardsofsmart.net/](http://wizardsofsmart.net/) Twitter: @panesofglass Website: [http://panesofglass.org/](http://panesofglass.org/) On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas M. \ wrote: BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the cryptographic algorithms, of course. If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs. Tomas ---
**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-libraries-ironruby/180337/3 "2009-12-17T20:14:26Z")
Correction: replace “Creative Commons” with CPL: [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cpl1.0.php](http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cpl1.0.php) From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)] On Behalf Of Jimmy Schementi Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 10:55 AM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==\> IronRuby For the rest of our ~10% missing Ruby built-in/library support, using code from Rubinius could possibly make more things work. I’d try this out for a library you care about that isn’t implemented, see if you can get all the specs passing for that, and report back. =) However, are you referring to “C-library ports to Ruby” that are outside the Ruby stdlib (as in, 3rd party libs, gems, etc)? I don’t know of many of those existing, but probably because I haven’t been looking, but again if they do exist their doesn’t seem like anything wrong with trying to get them working on IronRuby for more 3rd party library support. The only issues I see is if they somehow use Rubinius only features. Another thing to be aware of is licensing; the IronRuby codebase is partitioned into three licenses, based on where we got the code from: Ms-Pl, Ruby license, and Creative Commons. If the intention is to commit these Ruby libraries into IronRuby to fill out our support, then we just need to be mindful of what license the incoming code. ~Jimmy From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)] On Behalf Of Ryan R. Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 9:00 AM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==\> IronRuby Tomas’s message below seems to reflect what I’ve been thinking lately. Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I’m supposing that IR performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else’s work). Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, atm, I’m just wondering “out loud.” Cheers! Ryan R. Email: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) LinkedIn: [http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley) Blog: [http://wizardsofsmart.net/](http://wizardsofsmart.net/) Twitter: @panesofglass Website: [http://panesofglass.org/](http://panesofglass.org/) On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas M. \ wrote: BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the cryptographic algorithms, of course. If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs. Tomas ---
**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2010, 10:26am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/ruby-libraries-ironruby/180337/4 "2010-02-07T10:26:45Z")
About OpenSSL, IronPython already supports ssl ([http://www.python.org/doc/2.6/library/ssl.html](http://www.python.org/doc/2.6/library/ssl.html)) and that code could be used as a starting point. Not sure how much overlap there is between the two versions of SSL. Just updating the mailing list after hearing about the IronPython version recently… * * * From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid] on behalf of Ryan R. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid] Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:59 AM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: [Ironruby-core] Ruby Libraries ==\> IronRuby Tomas’s message below seems to reflect what I’ve been thinking lately. Does anyone else think that in many cases porting C libraries to Ruby or even reusing ports from the Rubinius project would be beneficial to getting more libraries running on IronRuby? I’m supposing that IR performance will continue to improve, and I like the idea of contributing to more than one project (or reusing someone else’s work). Is that a good idea? Should we instead wait for FFI on IR? Or is all of this a case-by-case basis approach? I have nothing concrete in mind, atm, I’m just wondering “out loud.” Cheers! Ryan R. Email: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) LinkedIn: [http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley) Blog: [http://wizardsofsmart.net/](http://wizardsofsmart.net/) Twitter: @panesofglass Website: [http://panesofglass.org/](http://panesofglass.org/) On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Tomas M. \ wrote: BTW: Since parts of the OpenSSL library are already written in Ruby (see ruby-1.8.6p368\lib\ruby\1.8\openssl directory) it might be easier to write the rest in Ruby as well. With calls to .NET implementation of the cryptographic algorithms, of course. If you chose to go that way you can add the scripts to Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs. Tomas