From: Conrad Schneiker <schneiker@...>
Date: 2001-11-30T03:55:05+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:26945] Re: Vote in the current poll!

"Robert Feldt" <feldt@ce.chalmers.se> wrote:

> Maybe Dave have already promoted the latest RubyGarden poll; I've missed
> it so here goes:
>
> Please vote in the RubyGarden poll on the max length of your Ruby
> programs.

IMHO, you should have asked by qualifying for the max length of programs
that are widely distributed or run routinely, or for the maximum length of
Ruby programs that you have fixed or modified that are widely distributed or
run routinely, whichever is larger.

It might also be interesting to do a statistical review of the parts of the
standard Ruby distribution that are written in Ruby, which in turn might
serve as a crude indication how Ruby is likely used for the more CPAN-like
parts of the RAA, which hopefully will undergo dramatic growth in scope and
capability over the next few years.

> Basically do you think there is a market for a Ruby compiler and binary
> tools?

Maybe when Ruby becomes widely enough used that ActiveState supports it.

My guess is that, at present, the overwhelmingly primary motivation for
wanting compiling to a binary is to facilitate distribution and deployment
of Ruby programs without having to install (and keep up to date) other
stuff, and that this capability would likely be widely used only if it was a
free part of the standard distribution.

Conrad