22 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
I've had some issues getting things to work right. My project uses the EventMachine gem, but my project just doesn't seem to find it after installation. I know there are several of you out there that use Ruby with windows, so I was hoping someone might point me to a helpful site. I can't seem to find anything at the moment.
I'm currently using Netbeans(ruby) with ruby 1.8.6
Well, I've had a few different people report issues with EventMachine in windows. You may look for the a ruby gem specifically made for windows. I think they're usually like EventMachine-win32.
22 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Thanks, you know, I've got things going now, but what's with the changes? It's having issues with the keyword "next"?
22 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
Yeah, never mind the last post, just some simple syntax differences. As far as eventmachine-win32, there seems to be some bugs to work out. I'll probably just try to write things to 1.9 standard and change things when my game goes live. I'm using Netbeans, and it helps point out anything that should be changed to be compliant with 1.9*
I love several of the updates though, especially what they have done with Hashes.
I've been using 1.9 for quite some time now. There's quite a few changes, but overall I think they did a good job keeping the syntax the same. It uses a completely different intrepreter from 1.8 that was developed completely separate from Matz's Ruby Interpreter (1.0-1.8.6). I think eventually they just realized that YARV was superior in almost every area and adopted. A lot of the 'changes' are things that have been in place since YARV's creation. It's been available for a good while now. It just was never the reference implementation until recently.
22 Feb, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
Runter said:
I think eventually they just realized that YARV was superior in almost every area and adopted.
I think eventually they just realized that YARV was superior in almost every area and adopted.
"Almost" – where is it inferior? (just curious)
Well, I think some would say that some of the differences (or aforementioned 'changes') were undesirable. For example, one such change was:
var = "test" var[0] ### returns "t"
This in 1.8 returned an integer value representing the character t.
22 Feb, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Oh. Well, I think it's "undesirable" for people if they thought it was convenient to do so, but really it seems kind of clear that that is more correct from almost any point of view. (For example, it's consistent with the strings-as-containers abstraction, where indexing into it gives you contained elements, namely characters.)
So the changes were things like that? The way I read your sentence (which could have been way off) was that there were some things for which Matz's interpreter was more unambiguously superior. (The above case is an interesting one and even though I think the new version is strictly speaking more correct, I can see that it could be considered preference.)
So the changes were things like that? The way I read your sentence (which could have been way off) was that there were some things for which Matz's interpreter was more unambiguously superior. (The above case is an interesting one and even though I think the new version is strictly speaking more correct, I can see that it could be considered preference.)
Well, aside from some of the syntax changes there are cases where 1.8 benchmarks slightly better depending on the code in question. For example, it's been determined that Rails is working better with 1.8 speedwise. Or was when 1.9 first was adopted. It's possible that Rails has been optimized for YARV by now.
In most benchmarks YARV handily beats MRI. I know there are specific cases where MRI did better.
22 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
I hope that I can get EM to work properly. I've enjoyed using it to take my mind off of the lower level socket code, and focus on making the game itself. The last thing I want to do is rewrite how the server works, but if I have to, I guess that's what encapsulation is for (shrug)
I hope that I can get EM to work properly. I've enjoyed using it to take my mind off of the lower level socket code, and focus on making the game itself. The last thing I want to do is rewrite how the server works, but if I have to, I guess that's what encapsulation is for (shrug)
Well…it uses the same structure as a lot of the libraries do. (reactor pattern?) You should be able to maybe plug something else in there fairly easily.
But yes, I like eventmachine quite a bit, but because it's not exclusive to Ruby it seems a little slow to get brought up to speed with new releases.
I'm curious, though. Why not use linux? :p I've found it to be much more friendly for developing in Ruby. Admittedly, I haven't spent much time trying to dev with Ruby in windows other than to help friends get set up with it.
23 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
I do like linux, i guess it's just laziness :p BTW, what IDE do you like? I am all about Vim when using linux, but never did the build activating Ruby and what not. I've used Netbeans and Eclipse in Windows.
You might look at this. I found it extremely useful in the past for developing out of linux while remaining in windows. This also lets you write code in windows and run it in linux immediately.
23 Feb, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
Looks cool, like a non messy Cygwin (no offense to Cygwin, I just haven't had the best time with it) Thanks for the input, i'll give it a try.
My project uses the EventMachine gem, but my project just doesn't seem to find it after installation.
I know there are several of you out there that use Ruby with windows, so I was hoping someone might point
me to a helpful site. I can't seem to find anything at the moment.
I'm currently using Netbeans(ruby) with ruby 1.8.6