From: Garance A Drosehn Date: 2005-02-05T08:00:53+09:00 Subject: Re: lack of reaction to latest ruby implementations On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 07:04:11 +0900, Alexander Kellett wrote: > > working on alternatives for the ruby runtime has > to be about the most difficult tasks one could take > on, and on top of that, the community interest doesn't > really help. > > maybe its just me but i expected *many* more emails in > reply to the yarv and ruby2c releases!!!!! I am fairly interested in ruby2c, but I haven't had time to look into it. It doesn't help if you hide references to it under a subject of 'lack of reaction to ruby implementations'. I'm on enough busy mailing lists that I receive an average of 1000 emails per day. If your subject is meaningless to me, then I never read the discussion. That said, I did see some other reference to ruby2c. I think that might make ruby more attractive to use in the "base system" of some operating system. But I'm wondering if it really turns the script into plain C -- with no dependencies on a ruby interpretter. Or if it is like some other "scripting-language to executable" things which I have seen, which merely combine the entire interpretter, support libraries, and the source-script into one extremely large and ungainly mess which happens to be a single executable program. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = drosihn@gmail.com Senior Systems Programmer or gad@FreeBSD.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy, NY; USA