[#83328] tcltklib and not init'ing tk — aakhter@... (Aamer Akhter)

Hello,

13 messages 2003/10/01

[#83391] mixing in class methods — "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...>

Okay, probably a dumb question, but: is there any way to define

22 messages 2003/10/01
[#83392] Re: mixing in class methods — Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...> 2003/10/01

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 06:02:32 +0900

[#83397] Re: mixing in class methods — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...> 2003/10/01

On Thursday, October 2, 2003, 7:08:00 AM, Ryan wrote:

[#83399] Re: mixing in class methods — "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> 2003/10/02

On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:37:25AM +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

[#83404] Re: mixing in class methods — "Gavin Sinclair" <gsinclair@...> 2003/10/02

> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 07:37:25AM +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

[#83416] C or C++? — "Joe Cheng" <code@...>

I'd like to start writing Ruby extensions. Does it make a difference

32 messages 2003/10/02
[#83435] Re: C or C++? — "Aleksei Guzev" <aleksei.guzev@...> 2003/10/02

[#83448] xml in Ruby — paul vudmaska <paul_vudmaska@...> 2003/10/02

The biggest problem i have with Ruby is the sleepness

[#83455] Re: xml in Ruby — Chad Fowler <chad@...> 2003/10/02

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, paul vudmaska wrote:

[#83464] Re: xml in Ruby or no xml it's just a question — paul vudmaska <paul_vudmaska@...> 2003/10/02

>>--------

[#83470] Re: xml in Ruby — paul vudmaska <paul_vudmaska@...>

>>>

15 messages 2003/10/02

[#83551] xml + ruby — paul vudmaska <paul_vudmaska@...>

>>---------

20 messages 2003/10/03
[#83562] Re: xml + ruby — Austin Ziegler <austin@...> 2003/10/03

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 16:11:46 +0900, paul vudmaska wrote:

[#83554] hash of hashes — Paul Argentoff <argentoff@...>

Hi all.

18 messages 2003/10/03

[#83675] fox-tool - interactive gui builder for fxruby — henon <user@...>

hi fellows,

15 messages 2003/10/05

[#83730] Re: Enumerable#inject is surprising me... — "Weirich, James" <James.Weirich@...>

> Does it surprise you?

17 messages 2003/10/06
[#83732] Re: Enumerable#inject is surprising me... — nobu.nokada@... 2003/10/07

Hi,

[#83801] Extension Language for a Text Editor — Nikolai Weibull <ruby-talk@...>

OK. So I'm going to write a text editor for my masters' thesis. The

35 messages 2003/10/08
[#83803] Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor — Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...> 2003/10/08

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 05:06:32 +0900

[#83806] Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor — Nikolai Weibull <ruby-talk@...> 2003/10/08

* Ryan Pavlik <rpav@mephle.com> [Oct, 08 2003 22:30]:

[#83812] Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor — Ryan Pavlik <rpav@...> 2003/10/08

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 06:09:29 +0900

[#83955] Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor — Nikolai Weibull <ruby-talk@...> 2003/10/09

* Ryan Pavlik <rpav@mephle.com> [Oct, 09 2003 09:10]:

[#84169] General Ruby Programming questions — Simon Kitching <simon@...>

21 messages 2003/10/15
[#84170] Re: General Ruby Programming questions — Florian Gross <flgr@...> 2003/10/15

Simon Kitching wrote:

[#84172] Re: General Ruby Programming questions — Simon Kitching <simon@...> 2003/10/15

Hi Florian..

[#84331] Re: Email Harvesting — Greg Vaughn <gvaughn@...>

Ryan Dlugosz said:

17 messages 2003/10/21
[#84335] Re: Email Harvesting — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...> 2003/10/21

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Greg Vaughn wrote:

[#84343] Re: Email Harvesting — Ruben Vandeginste <Ruben.Vandeginste@...> 2003/10/22

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 08:35:32 +0900, Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng

[#84341] Ruby-oriented Linux distro? — Hal Fulton <hal9000@...>

There's been some talk of something like this in the past.

15 messages 2003/10/22
[#84348] Re: Ruby-oriented Linux distro? — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...> 2003/10/22

On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, 6:01:16 PM, Hal wrote:

[#84351] Re: Ruby-oriented Linux distro? — Andrew Walrond <andrew@...> 2003/10/22

On Wednesday 22 Oct 2003 11:02 am, Gavin Sinclair wrote:

[#84420] Struggling with variable arguments to block — "Gavin Sinclair" <gsinclair@...>

Hi -talk,

18 messages 2003/10/24
[#84428] Re: Struggling with variable arguments to block — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/10/24

Hi,

[#84604] ruby-dev summary 21637-21729 — Takaaki Tateishi <ttate@...>

Hello,

21 messages 2003/10/30
[#84787] Re: ruby-dev summary 21637-21729 — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2003/11/06

On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 07:01:28AM +0900, Takaaki Tateishi wrote:

[#84789] Re: ruby-dev summary 21637-21729 — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/11/06

Hi,

[#84792] Re: ruby-dev summary 21637-21729 — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2003/11/06

On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:17:59PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#84794] Re: ruby-dev summary 21637-21729 — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2003/11/06

Hi,

Re: [Q] Ruby and XUL?

From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2003-10-31 18:39:49 UTC
List: ruby-talk #84624

James Britt (jamesUNDERBARb@seemyemail.com) wrote:

> You may want to scope out the discussion about XUL and XAML (Microsoft's=
=20
> XML-GUI language) on the xml-dev mailing list [0].
>=20
> I found these comments particularly interesting:
>=20
> "Hmm. To me it looks like XAML is considerably better designed than XUL.=
=20
> This is very much like the difference between SVG and XSL-FO that I=20
> wrote about in Item 11 of Effective XML, Make structure explicit through=
=20
> markup. XUL is using a double syntax with embedded CSS. The syntax=20
> should be XML, even if the semantics come from CSS. XAML and XSL-FO get=
=20
> this right. XUL and SVG get this wrong. I've now put that chapter=20
> online: http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml/chapters/11.html"
>   -- Elliotte Rusty Harold

A benefit of XUL is that it is similar enough to HTML that anybody who
has written a web page can probably understand a XUL page.

XAML isn't XML as a user interface, it is a definition for a UI that
is then compiled.  This requires the web-savvy to learn new ways of
thinking.

XAML isn't targetting the web-savvy, its targetting the .NET-savvy.
XUL is targetting the web-savvy, with XML, DOM, and CSS all available
at runtime.  XAML will have its own implementation of the same
functionality that will be easily digestible by someone familiar with
=2ENET.

> "I expect to see XML based languages like perhaps XUL to
> be included in gnome or KDE. However, if Gnome and KDE use the same
> language as Microsoft, the impact would even be greater and would
> probably put some W3C technologies out of the picture. Strategically,
> both KDE and Gnome should also 'embrace and expand' to gain some market
> share. I doubt they will do it since the will to win is less strong than
> the will to 'be against the devil empire'. Nonetheless, if by some luck,
> leaders of these communities learned some strategic tricks and want to
> win some market share, the 'embrace and expand' strategy can potentially
> transform the web as we know it. "
>   -- Didier PH Martin

If you want to capture programmers who are web app writers, it would
make more sense to use XUL, because it uses many technologies that
web app writers are familiar with.  In either case, building a UI out of
XML makes sense, because so many people are familiar with HTML, but XAML
may find itself much harder to sell if it isn't familar to the
web-centric.

http://www.xulplanet.com/ndeakin/archive/2003/10/29/ was a basis for
this email.

--=20
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
All messages signed with fingerprint:
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E  7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/oqx1MypVHHlsnwQRAvclAKDnfqhQD9cWDdZ7sxdcxKL5pU5yGwCfdT+8
kVlcTvsHcUdoF+LYCrLtlbI=
=lijN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


In This Thread