Forum: Ruby Are there any Ruby Technical Writers here?

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.
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-04 22:49
I am a beginner with Ruby who was interested in writing some programs.
Yet, in different forums of IT I never have had the chance to meet any
Ruby technical writers I can remember. Anyhow, I wanted to see if I
could network with some of you to make some programs of our own design.

:ciao:

My personal email is vito.matro@spainmail.com if any of you would like
to work on some real-world projects. I wanted to specifically work on
building an object-oriented designed program, which would advocate Ruby
programmers in open-source create their own programs. I think
object-oriented development should be reconsidered in Ruby and expanded
upon, besides allowing JRuby to steal the show. More technical concepts
should be innovated for Ruby outside of Java, which is why I wanted to
learn Ruby in the first place.
E0d864d9677f3c1482a20152b7cac0e2?d=identicon&s=25 Robert Klemme (Guest)
on 2008-12-04 23:37
(Received via mailing list)
On 04.12.2008 22:43, Vito Fontaine wrote:
> I wanted to specifically work on
> building an object-oriented designed program, which would advocate Ruby
> programmers in open-source create their own programs.

Can you be even more specific about your idea?  From what you write it
sounds interesting but I have zero clue what "advocating" in this
context is supposed to mean.

> I think
> object-oriented development should be reconsidered in Ruby and expanded
> upon, besides allowing JRuby to steal the show.

In what way should we reconsider OOD in Ruby?  And why?  What is wrong
with OOD in Ruby today?

> More technical concepts
> should be innovated for Ruby outside of Java, which is why I wanted to
> learn Ruby in the first place.

Again, what do you mean by "technical concepts should be innovated ...
outside of Java"?

Cheers

  robert
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 04:11
Robert Klemme wrote:
> On 04.12.2008 22:43, Vito Fontaine wrote:
>> I wanted to specifically work on
>> building an object-oriented designed program, which would advocate Ruby
>> programmers in open-source create their own programs.
>
> Can you be even more specific about your idea?  From what you write it
> sounds interesting but I have zero clue what "advocating" in this
> context is supposed to mean.

I meant I wanted to write a Ruby program based on Ruby's OOD resources
to develop newer, modernized concepts from Ruby's OOD fundamental code.
Sort of building a program which would be like a Rails framework, but
only in the programming form of Ruby without Rails. I think Ruby alone
can be made to be portable without the help of Rails. In a simple
programmable format towards an application, the program would be a
compilation of re-coding concepts to strengthen Ruby against thee Java
brand.

Why isn't there a Ruby platform for better object-oriented programming
done in Ruby OOD? Why even do we need Java embedded into Ruby? I love
the Java language, but as a passionate programmer who has created a few
Ruby programs alone, this almost angers me a bit. I think Ruby is great
the way it is and does not need to be merged with Java is my point. I
dislike when programmers do that process of merging languages, if it
does not create a whole new language, I mean, then what is the point?
Portability between programmable software could still be met without
borrowing coding from a completely different programming language, such
as Java. I love Ruby too, and this again makes me a bit
over-compassionate, disliking how Ruby's popularity has gone down in
comparison to Java's. Ruby's fundamental coding can be re-coded to do
all of this. I do not see the need for JRuby, unless people just want to
abandon Ruby and program Java programs for the point being.
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 04:23
Vito Fontaine wrote:
>> On 04.12.2008 22:43, Vito Fontaine wrote:
> I think Ruby is great
> the way it is and does not need to be merged with Java is
> my point...
> I do not see the need for JRuby...
>

Re-emphasizing this point above.. I think Ruby OOD is as good as Java's
but because it has an overwhelming size of a library full of classes,
the IT
and open-source community tend to gravitate more as Java being the
premier
and better language for OOD. Through creating a simple program for OOD
built on the fundamentals of Ruby OOD, I think my objective is to prove
those
naysayers wrong about Ruby. Ruby's OOD is perfect the way it is, but I
think
those techies out there need a reminder, which is why this project would
be
important to me. Plus, I think it would only add to Ruby's already
extensive
library for smaller programs directory.

Cheers!
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 04:29
The technical concepts reconsidered is to build off the Ruby OOD, and to
simply make it better by recoding its unique parts. Doing all of this
into a tools program for open-source programmers. Therefore, they will
have access to a Ruby program which will give the programmers better
tools and resources to refine their own programming done in Ruby OOD.
Sorry for the excessive paragraphs. I love Ruby so much, I get inspired
to write more. In the future, I will calm down and revise my sentences
to be logically more straightforward.

:ciao:
E0d864d9677f3c1482a20152b7cac0e2?d=identicon&s=25 Robert Klemme (Guest)
on 2008-12-05 09:35
(Received via mailing list)
2008/12/5 Vito Fontaine <vito.matro@spainmail.com>:
[...]

Despite all the words you did not answer my question.  I'm afraid, if
you want to attract people or even get support for your endeavor you
need to provide more meat.

Cheers

robert
Ae16cb4f6d78e485b04ce1e821592ae5?d=identicon&s=25 Martin DeMello (Guest)
on 2008-12-05 10:29
(Received via mailing list)
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Vito Fontaine <vito.matro@spainmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Why isn't there a Ruby platform for better object-oriented programming
> done in Ruby OOD? Why even do we need Java embedded into Ruby? I love
> the Java language, but as a passionate programmer who has created a few
> Ruby programs alone, this almost angers me a bit. I think Ruby is great
> the way it is and does not need to be merged with Java is my point.

This explains some of the advantages:

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AlternateHardAndSoftLayers

What JRuby provides access to is not Java per se, but the JVM
ecosystem, which is very well worth having. Read through some of the
Clojure documentation too - Rich Hickey talks about why he implemented
his language atop the JVM. You can write JRuby in a pure ruby style,
using only the libraries from Java.

martin
F53b05cdbdf561cfe141f69b421244f3?d=identicon&s=25 David A. Black (Guest)
on 2008-12-05 11:01
(Received via mailing list)
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Vito Fontaine wrote:

> I do not see the need for JRuby, unless people just want to abandon
> Ruby and program Java programs for the point being.

You seem to think that JRuby is some kind of Ruby-killer. It isn't;
it's a Ruby implementation. Among many other things, it raises the
likelihood of Ruby being seriously considered in organizations where
Java is firmly entrenched.

Please have a look at the available information on the history and
goals of the project.


David
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 16:13
David A. Black wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Vito Fontaine wrote:
>
>> I do not see the need for JRuby, unless people just want to abandon
>> Ruby and program Java programs for the point being.
>
> You seem to think that JRuby is some kind of Ruby-killer. It isn't;
> it's a Ruby implementation. Among many other things, it raises the
> likelihood of Ruby being seriously considered in organizations where
> Java is firmly entrenched.
>
> Please have a look at the available information on the history and
> goals of the project.
>
>
> David

Perhaps, you guys are right about JRuby. I haven't indulged myself in
its writing yet. However, I still think despite it using the JVM, it
isn't necessary. I do think it was a great idea to create JRuby though.
This might sound hypocritical of me, but what I was also getting at was
what if Ruby had its own updated VM, different from what it already has?
That is what I was getting at. I agree and know what JRuby is, but it
kind of implements the focus on the JVM instead of Ruby's own RVM, I at
least think. Again, I love all the foundations and modernizations of
Ruby. I have great respect for JRuby. Next, time I will speak
accordingly concise. Instead, I will start the project myself on my own
time, then I will ask for everyone's advocacy later. This way you guys
will see what I am going after. I have been telling you guys only part
of what I want to do with Ruby, yet it is to making it simple and true
to Ruby's programming, as well as expanding on the platform. I haven't
been working with Ruby that long but understand it. With that said, I am
working to raise funding for the project. I will be back later with an
e-Book on what I look forward to do with this Ruby project. It will take
a whole e-Book to outline the project, and will take lots of programmers
help as well.

:adios:
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 16:20
Plus, I have just started a not-for-profit organization. It's goals are
based on educational development, besides other things. I am an expert
in what I do, and will work accordingly. The idea I've told pieces of
has everything to do with including the Ruby platform. I do not want to
create a different language at all, but to add different tools,
resources, and everything else to Ruby. Besides, adding a whole bunch of
other cool features. The organization's online documentation will be
based on Ruby development for all open-source developers everywhere. I
am sorry for the inconvenience, whereas I should have produced a very
short e-Book on this massive project, and embedded it within this forum
so everyone could understand its objective, main idea, and overall goal
for development.

:Peace be upon you:
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-05 16:59
P.S. - I plan on implementing J-Ruby into the program as well but
differently with a unique set of motives. Lastly, I will not be writing
anything else in response until I have the e-Book completed and finish
fund-raising for this. The organization has its own website, but now is
under reconstruction with a refocus towards Ruby Object-Oriented
Development. I will be back to drop the website link when it is
relaunched with the appropriate information. I have thought of other
concepts to implement in the program just talking to you guys. Whether
you know it or not, your feedback advocates the process.

:adios los informadores:
703fbc991fd63e0e1db54dca9ea31b53?d=identicon&s=25 Robert Dober (Guest)
on 2008-12-05 18:37
(Received via mailing list)
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Vito Fontaine <vito.matro@spainmail.com>
wrote:

> :adios los informadores:
I think that you might benefit of a different approach here. Honestly
you risk being put on lots of kill files.

I have had your enthusiastic questions and point of views, actually
this is great. But in order to learn and to become a valuable member
of this community ( assuming that you want this ) it might you get
further by taking it a little bit easier. (Chi va piano va sano e
lontano, surely you can understand this ;)

I myself benefited a lot from people calming me down (how are you
doing Gregory;) ?), although it took me some time to accept that they
were not stupid. And actually I fully expect you to think the same of
me, it would be insulting your intellect if I were not. The challenge
AMOF is how to tell me without being rude and keep the dialog open.

Back to some technical reasoning:
It takes some time to understand certain subtle details of Ruby. BTW I
agree that Ruby programming can benefit of research (maybe you want to
have a look at it, but for the time being please ignore the last post,
I gotta get it offline and revise it ;):
http://ruby-smalltalk.blogspot.com/2007_08_01_archive.html and if you
are interested in traits you might have a look at this:
http://rubyforge.org/projects/ruby-traits/.
If OTOH you are more interested in AOP than you should browse the list
for this, IIRC Ara.T.Howard and Tom(aka Trans) are quite interested in
these and have done some work on it.

It might also be a good idea to tell us and specifically Robert(K)
what you are after in some *short* phrases ;).


Cheers
Robert
--
Ne baisse jamais la tête, tu ne verrais plus les étoiles.

Robert Dober ;)
E0d864d9677f3c1482a20152b7cac0e2?d=identicon&s=25 Robert Klemme (Guest)
on 2008-12-06 12:55
(Received via mailing list)
On 05.12.2008 16:53, Vito Fontaine wrote:
> Lastly, I will not be writing
> anything else in response until I have the e-Book completed and finish
> fund-raising for this.

IMHO you would be better off by first writing up a short concept and
then start raising funds.  EBook sounds large to me (100 or more pages)
but I believe you need a more concise conceptual summary, if only to
attract initial interest.

You need to be aware that you compete against *a lot* of individuals and
companies (some of them large and long known players in the field) in
this area for attention and time resources.  In order to be successful
you need to manage to gain enough initial interest to motivate people to
actually spend further resources (e.g. time for reading the full
concept, money, working time).

> I will be back to drop the website link when it is
> relaunched with the appropriate information.

Let's see how it goes.

Cheers

  robert
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-07 07:01
Robert Klemme wrote:
> On 05.12.2008 16:53, Vito Fontaine wrote:
>> Lastly, I will not be writing
>> anything else in response until I have the e-Book completed and finish
>> fund-raising for this.
>
> IMHO you would be better off by first writing up a short concept and
> then start raising funds.  EBook sounds large to me (100 or more pages)
> but I believe you need a more concise conceptual summary, if only to
> attract initial interest.
>
> You need to be aware that you compete against *a lot* of individuals and
> companies (some of them large and long known players in the field) in
> this area for attention and time resources.  In order to be successful
> you need to manage to gain enough initial interest to motivate people to
> actually spend further resources (e.g. time for reading the full
> concept, money, working time).
>
>> I will be back to drop the website link when it is
>> relaunched with the appropriate information.
>
> Let's see how it goes.
>
> Cheers
>
>   robert


I've changed my mind. Since you made some key-points about the project's
e-book soon to be written, besides funding, etcetera, I will reply.

...

The e-book will be very short and no longer than 21 pages. It will
consist of the project's focus, objective, mission, vision, issue, idea,
initiative, work in progress, set of development guidelines, open-source
standards, compatibility  with ruby, interoperability with other
programming languages, and finally opportunities to help build its
platform. The structure of it will be sort of like how other innovative
teams have contribute to J-Ruby and Iron-Ruby. The project will be named
similar to those subdivisions of the Ruby Programming language. Lastly,
the internet site will be focused on making money from teaching the
platform afterwards. I'm going to write the whole rough draft of the
project myself beforehand, because I want it to follow a certain pathway
of development. I know what exactly the project will ultimately create
and how am I planning to make it similar to J-Ruby and Iron-Ruby. I'd
rather spend my life developing for a good cause more than anything else
anyway. By the way, I will not be asking for donations neither. I will
use all of my own money to fund this and I do not want anyone's advocacy
funding this. This is my own compassionate contribution to open-source
society. Peace be upon you!

:ciao:
Ec5a3e705cc43987ca1c6d0ad96c99d7?d=identicon&s=25 Vito Fontaine (vito_matro)
on 2008-12-07 07:10
>> On 06.12.2008 00:09, Vito Fontaine wrote:
>Lastly, the internet site will be focused on making money from teaching the >platform 
afterwards.

Actually, I will not charge money for tutorials I've decided. I already
have all the concepts assembled and will be embedding them inside coding
very soon. Anyhow, I will market the website like any other site,
because I know how I can for the money it would take. And, the
organization will be selling other things related to the project, but
outside of that to make sure the global open-source community can get
their hands on it.

(LAST POST) ;)
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.