From: Jayson Williams <williams.jayson@...>
Date: 2007-09-19T02:52:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Tk Ruby / Fx Ruby / Wx Ruby

wxRuby was definately one near the top of the list. My only objection
to using it was that the smallest exe file I could obtain when using
wxRuby was a wapping 8Meg. I dont know if that should be expected, but
it seemed really big to me. Performance, looks and syntax were all a
plus with me. The size of the exe file was the only drawback.

On 9/18/07, Chauk-Mean P. <chauk.mean@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Joyce wrote:
> > Alex hit on a VERY good point, ease/difficulty of installation and
> > redistribution is a big deal with GUI tool kits!
>
> Here is my personal point of view ...
>
> I just (re)discovered wxRuby with the 1.9.1 beta release and I like it
> for the following reasons (in the order of my preferences) :
>
> - Ruby user friendly syntax (the 1.9.1 beta release includes sugar
> syntax from wxSugar and upcoming release will improve the syntax
> further)
> - really native toolkit that looks great on WinXP for example.
> I'm almost sure that FOX and thus FXRuby are not native toolkits.
> - very easy installation (only one binary gem)
> - flexible licence (commercial and opensource usages)
> - support for Windows, Linux and MacOSX (even if I mainly use Windows)
>
> I'm not a member of the wxRuby team but they have done a good job with
> the upcoming wxRuby2.
> Nevertheless, if you have different preferences/requirements, your
> choice will be likely different.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chauk-Mean.
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
>