From: Phillip Gawlowski <cmdjackryan@...>
Date: 2011-04-15T04:33:13+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby for beginners (was: Re: Hello)

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net> wrote:
>
> More to the point, there are more users of Linux-based systems who are
> not so savvy, thanks to the newbie outreach of distributions like
> PCLinuxOS and Mint.

Ah, I see. Well, in such a case a recipe to get up to speed with Ruby
and a good tutorial would be the most useful (leave maintaining Linux
packages to the Linux maintainers, I'd say).

> Yeah -- my main concern with using JRuby is the requirements on the user
> side and the potential issues with more, and more complex, components of
> the package that might have issues.  A few users having problems can
> produce a lot of "Why doesn't this just work?" noise.

Two solutions:
1) Vendor the JRE privately, and use the one you include in your
package (downside: balloons download size).
2) Check for Java at install time, and download it during install time
if not present (downside: increases the time an install takes.

Both downsides are one time costs, though.

Mind: I'd rather provide two packages (one for Windows, one for Mac /
Linux) with good user experience, rather than one package with
mediocre experience.

> Of course, I was thinking of MS Windows.  Apple MacOS X users tend to
> care a lot more about that kind of thing, to the point people have
> actually made particular Mac purchases for the purpose of matching their
> drapes.

There's a reason Windows applications look, well, boring. ;)

A native look and feel means that a user doesn't have to learn new
metaphors for how things are done, since things look and work the same
as (s)he's used to.

But I don't think--at all--that providing an editor that looks and
feels slightly odd would put anyone off so completely that they'd
never, ever again try programming and/or Ruby.

> Actually, I think it would be better to do without an IDE -- but also to
> do without pushing an editor on the user, especially when there's an
> editor already on the system with which the user might already be
> familiar.

Oh, certainly. But since notepad.exe can't even show line numbers, and
the Ruby interpreter refers to line numbers, you can end up with
problems there, too.

That said: There's no problem with bundling an editor, and make it a
default during install time that the user can simply decide not to
install.

> Uh . . . since when is monospace "gibberish"?  Variable-width fonts are
> *awful* for code editing.

Since you never encountered it otherwise, for example.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single instance where I
encountered a monospaced font outside of programming and related
things (like a website, or technical book).

Of course, users learn fast, too, unless you make it intentionally
difficult for them.

-- 
Phillip Gawlowski

Though the folk I have met,
(Ah, how soon!) they forget
When I've moved on to some other place,
There may be one or two,
When I've played and passed through,
Who'll remember my song or my face.