From: Alexander Kellett <ruby-lists@...>
Date: 2005-02-04T21:41:55+09:00
Subject: Re: lack of reaction to latest ruby implementations

On Feb 4, 2005, at 1:15 PM, Phil Tomson wrote:
> Yeah, Cardinal has been pretty quiet for a while now.  I wish I had 
> more
> time to work on it.  We actually had a plan to go the other direction 
> from
> Ruby2C: We wanted to convert RubyC to Ruby so we could automatically
> convert the built-in classes like array.c, hash.c, etc to Ruby code.  
> If
> we could do something like that it would be useful for metaruby as 
> well, I
> suspect.  Basically, we need a C parser in Racc - that's the first step
> anyway.  There are plenty of C grammars out there, so that shouldn't be
> too, too hard, but then again...

google pyggy. it includes a ansi c parser.
modify it to generate ruby eval-able structures
and load them into ruby. later on port it to ruby,
i'll help, i'm planning to do so anyways at some
point.

would you really want to convert the c anyway?
its a hell of a job and doesn't really provide
much anyway. the point in a ruby core lib written
in ruby itself is to have a well coded basis and
doing it in idiomatic c would thusly seem like
a much better idea, or am i missing something?
from the slant of correctness, yes i'd agree its
a nice aim. but i think it would be such a huge
investment that you may as well spend the time
writing testcases and idiomatic ruby...

> .....ah, but our ambitious plans haven't led to much action, 
> unfortuneatly.
> I haven't had any time to commit to Cardinal since last summer.

how about the other developers? i thought
there were a few working on it? maybe i was
mistaken, seems like a shame. how fast are
the python / perl6 implementations written
on top of parrot now?

Alex