From: Carl Jenkins <carljenkins@...>
Date: 2010-07-24T03:28:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Typical Ruby (non-rails) project structure.

Richard Conroy wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Carl Jenkins <carljenkins@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> What is/are the best-practice(s) for a Ruby project structure?
>>
> 
> Use the gem structure. Its pretty universal for packaging, structuring 
> and
> even deploying Ruby projects. Rails projects use their own structure, 
> but
> its well documented too.
> 
> 
>> As I am just learning Ruby I put everything in one file but, now I am
>> learning about Modules etc..
>>
>> In Java, classes where in packages which helped with code organization.
>> Is there a typical way to layout a Ruby project structure?
> 
> 
> Note that in Java packages also map 1:1 with the directory structure of 
> the
> classes, that is quite strict. In Ruby, the hierarchy of namespaces has
> no implications on how ruby files are loaded.
> 
> I haven't seen much information, beyond the replies here, that implies
> any consensus on how these files are structured or named.
> 
> It is worth researching exactly how 'require' and the load path works in
> Ruby. It is a bit alien coming from a Java background, but the mechanics
> of how it works will imply its own best practices.

When using them gem structure for example I have something like this.

new_proj/
 bin/
 lib/
    common/
      -new_file.rb
 spec/
 test/
  -new_test.rb

In order to test the new_file.rb my new_test.rb must have the path to 
the new_file.rb as the require correct? Something like require 
'../lib/common/new_file'

Or is there a different way to do that?

Thanks for all the help - (everyone) this is most helpful!

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.