From: Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>
Date: 2011-01-17T13:38:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Why Quby? (was Re: What are your ruby rough cuts ?)

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:45 PM, David Masover <ninja@slaphack.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, January 15, 2011 04:42:58 am Joseph Lenton wrote:
>> David Masover wrote in post #975080:
>> > On Friday, January 14, 2011 07:34:04 am Jonas Pfenniger (zimbatm) wrote:
>> >
>> > A final point: Browsers are getting fast enough that we should be able
>> > to do
>> > Ruby in Javascript. And not a server-side implementation, either -- I
>> > want the
>> > equivalent of JRuby. But this isn't really a limitation of Ruby, it's a
>> > limitation of browsers that we'd be working around. The above rants are
>> > things
>> > I actually feel are broken about Ruby as it is today.
>>
>> I'm sorry to take this slightly off topic, but I just can't let this
>> comment pass. I am currently building a language called Quby, which is a
>> very Ruby-like language, that runs 100% in the browser (about 4,000
>> lines of JS). There are differences (as it's Ruby-like not Ruby) with
>> the main one being that it's tied to a canvas. But AFAIK it's the
>> closest pure JS implementation of Ruby (although it's Quby, not Ruby).

I have to ask...does an applet not give you what you want? JRuby does
run fine in an applet, and with recent improvements to the Java
browser plugin it can do anything a Flash or other language plugin can
do (traverse and manipulate DOM, etc).

- Charlie