From: E S Date: 2005-02-16T06:53:43+09:00 Subject: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps? > L�hett�j�: Ilias Lazaridis > Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps? > > E S wrote: > >>L�hett�j�: Ilias Lazaridis > >>Aihe: Re: [EVALUATION] - E01: The Java Failure - May Ruby Helps? > >> > >>Austin Ziegler wrote: > >>[...] - (increased complexity, lost context) > >> > >>I'm sorry, I cannot continue the discussion. > >> > >>I just ask the community to point at least to an clear overview of the > >>building-blocks which I can use within ruby. > >> > >>As stated in another message: > >> > >>" > >>If i find e.g. 70% fo my requirements fulfilled within ruby, I would > >>possibly start to implement the remaining 30%. > >> > >>But possibly I should split my requirements down into smaller chunks, > >>and ask step by step. > >>" > >> > >>- > >> > >>So, most possibly I have to go this way. > >> > >>Asking step by step. > > > > This may sound like a stupid idea, but since it seems that these tools > > you crave for already exist in some form (even if they are proprietary > > and/or expensive), would it be too much trouble for you to name one > > for each 'frame' in your 'stack'? > > This is a very nice idea. > > But I cannot name them. The tools exist but you can't name them? J'accuse. > > For example: "I need a tool that can > > create anything that I want (currently VaporStudio from Imagitasy can > > do this)". This would help in giving you some concrete answers as it > > could help explain what you want, exactly (your 'stack' is > > ridiculously vague). > > I think the stack is very concise and precise. > > Another thing is, if it is imlementable. > > I will take the single-step-approach. > > Will open a new thread with the first part shortly. > > [If someone has answers to the full stack, they are of course welcome] > > > Secondly, and this may be just a language barrier issue, you come > > across as either a troll or just hostile. Revising your tone (or > > offering some other explanation) would probably help a lot. > > It's not a language barrier issue. > > I can change my [sterile, fact-oriented] writing-style. > > But I will not. Nice. I think you're done here. E