From: Urabe Shyouhei Date: 2010-06-30T20:03:08+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:30975] Re: [Feature #1478] Ruby archive This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigF1801B636D1C5AB0A844990F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Headius, I'm not against for the idea of archiving itself, and I don't th= ink compressions being evil. I'm just doubtful on it. (2010/06/30 18:59), Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Urabe Shyouhei wrote: >> That's what I'm in doubt. At the time of its appearance jar needed co= mpression >> because java aimed to be network-oriented. But definitely our browser= don't >> run ruby. >=20 > We have users running JRuby in applets in browsers with jar-compressed > scripts. It's pretty easy to do, and very handy to distribute a single > compressed file. That's because you're on Java. Not all the ruby impls can do that. > We also have folks starting to use JRuby on Android, where we also > support loading scripts out of compressed jar files (since that is > again the format for all Android application archives). You mean a Ruby's archive format should be targeted to Android? I don't = think so. The archiving format's main users should be a normal Ruby user. # No, I'm not ignoring Android. I just think that's too platform-specifi= c. # If compression is vital to Android you can take strategy like tar.gz. > And JRuby's "jruby-complete.jar" is all of JRuby plus the Ruby > standard library in a single 10-11MB file, where JRuby alone is about > 8-9MB of that. It would be closer to 18-19MB if we could not compress > stdlib into the jar file, and the "complete" jar's execution makes > heavy use of loading scripts out of the jar itself, similar to what > the new Ruby archive format could enable. The "complete" jar is used > in many prepackaged JRuby applications that need a single distribution > file. Yes, something like it should be handy. But the question: should it be compressed? You might not be aware of the decompression cost of such arc= hive because you all JVM users are blinded by the VM's quite sloooooooow start= up, but when it gets more faster than it is now like YARV does today, that ca= n potentially be a problem. > The use of jars and compressed jars is a very common, very useful tool > for JRuby users, and we've supported it for over four years. If Ruby > is going to adopt a standard archive format, it would seem rather > strange to ignore what we've done (and what users are doing) in JRuby > today. I agree with this sentence. JRuby should be studied in detail. --------------enigF1801B636D1C5AB0A844990F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwrJGsACgkQuTXPUnA5eMJJ/wCfd3G5F3OXUo+9lQLBcFFgedQt ONkAn3zfgCfTxvYWWEE1UVI1Be4+wksk =Aq2F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigF1801B636D1C5AB0A844990F--