[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005?

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2006-07-19 14:06:31 UTC
List: ruby-core #8278
Curt Hibbs wrote:
> This is the whole point of this thread. It appears that the only safe 
> thing
> is that the Ruby runtime and all extensions that its uses (both those
> included with the one-click installer and those provided by third 
> parties)
> need to be using the same compiler and that compiler needs to be freely
> available.
>
> I have two choices VS2005 Express and MinGW. What I really want to 
> know (as
> succinctly as possible) is what the pros and cons are for each path.
>
> Curt
Can *you* freely distribute VS2005 Express, or must a user who wants to 
build extensions with it acquire it themselves?
Can *you* freely distribute MinGW, or must a user who wants to build 
extensions with it acquire it themselves?

My point here is that a "one-click Ruby installer" should have the 
option to install a toolset for building extensions if the user doesn't 
already have that toolset. When I built the LyX editor on Windows, it 
pointed me to URLs for all of the things I needed (MikTeX, Python, etc.) 
That makes a lot of sense for LyX; MiKTeX is huge. But I would have 
preferred as much of the toolset bundled.


In This Thread