From: Patrick Fernie <patrick.fernie@...>
Date: 2005-06-28T23:20:46+09:00
Subject: Re: RubyGems Issue

Ah, this makes sense. Will the patched require eventually load by the
gem library name? This seems a little more natural, but then again I
suppose it leads to the problem of maintaining gemified and
non-gemified versions (whereas using the straight library name
doesn't). I suppose if I had paid more attention to the
documentation/examples provided by the gems I install, this would have
been obvious.

Thanks,
Patrick

On 6/28/05, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
> 
> On Jun 25, 2005, at 3:02 PM, Patrick Fernie wrote:
> 
> > I'm having a not-so-critical-but-still-irritating issue with
> > rubygems. It installed fine, and i can use gems, but only using
> > require_gem; using the redefined require (from custom_require.rb)
> > results in a load error.
> 
> The difference is that require_gem refers to the gem name and the
> patched require does not, it still refers to the library name.
> Another example is my gem ParseTree. You can do:
> 
> require 'rubygems'
> require_gem 'ParseTree'  # auto-requires parse_tree
> require 'sexp_processor'
> 
> Since require_gem can only (currently) auto-require a single library,
> if you want sexp_processor, you have to do that with a regular
> require. Alternatively, you can leave the gem names out of it:
> 
> require 'rubygems' require nil # require for non-gem setups
> require 'parse_tree'
> require 'sexp_processor'
> 
> Either one works fine. I prefer the latter and am switching all my
> code to it.
> 
> --
> ryand-ruby@zenspider.com - Seattle.rb - http://www.zenspider.com/
> seattle.rb
> http://blog.zenspider.com/ - http://rubyforge.org/projects/ruby2c
> 
> 
>