From: gw <gw@...>
Date: 2005-01-01T03:57:29+09:00
Subject: wrapping Ruby around OLD code

5 years ago one of our smart guys suggested we throw away our home grown "Basic" which glues our 
many software actions into a seeming whole. We had over the years created many verbs that are 
activated by special names. The "Basic" glue became more and more important and it was pointed out 
that our specialties should be the verbs NOT the "Basic". At that time Python was suggested as a 
replacement for our proprietary "Basic".

Here it is 5 years later and our programming staff is very small and the ancientness of our "Basic" 
MUST be dealt with. I am giving some consideration to Ruby, though I *know* that Python would do 
OK. I have programmed in many languages and I now include Python as one I know well enough.

I am initially attracted to Ruby because it promises more fewer special cases in syntax and its 
more purely object orientation. Not the least is it has not exploded (yet) to the point of being 
nearly impossible for a programmer to walk all the way round language.

Here is my question: Embedding our OLD code into Ruby is how big a chore? A lot of this code dates 
from the late 1980's and is in NO WAY object oriented. Python seems like it might let me get away 
with embedding old code without make major complaints. Have any of you attempted to incorporate 
procedural code (tied together with global variables) into Ruby? I would understand if 
knowledgeable programmers plead with me to not sully Ruby's name by attempting this Frankenstein. 
However, I want the power of new life for our "specialty verbs" that a modern, supported 
"scripting" language would provide.

Watching eagerly for enlightenment,
George Wyche
CITA Systems, Inc.