From: Richard Lyman <lymans@...>
Date: 2005-03-29T07:01:35+09:00
Subject: Re: Fox vs Fox12

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 06:43:33 +0900, Lyle Johnson <lyle.johnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:49:46 +0900, Kero <kero@chello.single-dot.nl> wrote:
> 
> > Can somebody PLEASE improve on the code below?
> > I mean... "require 'fox'" should just do it.
> > I know RUBY_OPTIONS can help with gems, but this fox vs fox12 stinks, too.
> > .... and this FOXVERSION and aliasing stuff... man, horrible.
> 
> Just to make something clear here: There were a number of API changes
> between FOX versions 1.0 and 1.2, and thus FOX version 1.2 isn't
> completely backwards-compatible with FOX 1.0.
> 
> It sounds like the original poster (Peter) in is the fortunate
> situation that his code happens to run just fine under either FOX
> version, but that's definitely the exception and not the rule. IMO, it
> would be preferable for application developers to go ahead and update
> their application(s) to FOX 1.2.
> 
> 


I'm kinda shocked that it runs under both versions. I mean - FOX 1.0
used 'Menubar' and FOX 1.2 introduced better consistency in the API
with 'MenuBar'. If your application uses a menu bar for it's menus
then you'd have to write something to switch the spelling...

-Rich