From: Trollen Lord <trollenlord@...>
Date: 2007-11-28T06:24:18+09:00
Subject: Re: "Why I Program In Ruby (And Maybe Why You Shouldn't)"

------=_Part_239_26000423.1196198659842
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

> But you are complaining about the general state of affairs; not
> anything ruby specific. As my posts demonstrated (I think) the ruby
> toolkit bindings are on par with the state of the art; whether that


Yes, BINDINGS are on par. However...

The state of the art? I'd say Shoes is that. It is dumb. Very dumb. But what
being dumb means is that there is a promise of separating the "this is what
I want" and "this is how I want to see it" from each other. It has been done
in other technologies like the web (html vs css) ages ago already and it has
major advantages. Shoes doesn't do it yet technically (nor ever will I
think?) but take a look at how you define the GUIs. It wouldn't be hard
removing the Cairo dependency and making it more dynamic. THAT is state of
the art and would make defining most of the GUIs a wonderful and Rubyish
process.


> state is sufficient is another story. (And regarding Vista, that's


Yup.


>
> kind of a low-blow, as less than half of the XP apps even work
> natively in Vista64, if at all). In any case, one is not without


They do in Vista32. Which I am using at this moment. I don't have very many
things to complain about actually and have not bumped into even one single
application myself yet that would not have worked. But I think that is
irrelevant path to start discussing further. In any case, Vista seems to be
closer to 10% adoption rate and somewhere perhaps near 20% (just a quick
quess, although it is possible to estimate really accurately and reliably -
there are methods for that if you have complete marketing data from longer
period) there is the tipping point. After that it will be landslide. That
10% from roughly 1,3 billion computers is 130 millions already. We are not
talking small "markets" here in any case.

because that's simply the state of the toolkits themselves. Toolkits
> aren't Hellen Keller, and Ruby isn't the Miracle Worker. You can only
> do so much with what you're given. ;)
>

I just have the feelign the entire approach is aged and there would be a
good moment for throughout sanity check.

------=_Part_239_26000423.1196198659842--