Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

SketchUp -> seeking Ruby overview in Rebolese

 [1/14] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 8-Aug-2004 13:30


Hi Does anyone here have Ruby experience? If so, I would very much appreciate any thoughts you have about Ruby from a Rebol perspective. At first glance it seems to be halfway between Python and REBOL. Ruby code is short and readable, uses blocks with methods in very direct powerful manner. Why Ruby? Well I've started using a superb 3D design tool call 'SketchUp' for some architectural projects. SketchUp uses Ruby for its scripting API, so I decided to explore Ruby. For people who think with a pen in their hand or sketch on napkins all the time like me, this is the most intuitive, fun, productive 3D software I've ever used. Thanks mainly to its [patented] inference engine and the simple focus in its design philosophy. If REBOL was a 3D design tool I think it would look a lot like SketchUp :-) Like Rebol, SketchUp is a highly interactive design tool. It invites one to start modeling in a simple sketchy mode, working on basic spatial massing, organizing these as reusable components,then returning later them, add details and make changes. It's being in design schools where I hear it is very popular. demo [PC/Mac] and tutorials available at http://sketchup.com thanks - Jason

 [2/14] from: chrismorency:videotron:ca at: 8-Aug-2004 19:34


Hi, Ruby has been mainly popular in Japan. It owes a lot to SmallTalk... But I much prefer the later. In fact, Smalltalk and Rebol are my favorite languages. Both language syntax can be learned by "ordinary" people really fast. Both are powerful learning language. I've read that Carl wrote a lot of language interpreter/compiler prior to writing Rebol and I can feel Smalltalk's influence. Rebol could benefit from a IDE like Smalltalk has since the 60's... An IDE that is much better than anything currently used by today standard including Eclipse. Eclipse is a mere shadow of a Smalltalk IDE. Why is that both languages are not commercially successful ? Chris

 [3/14] from: tim::johnsons-web::com at: 8-Aug-2004 15:48


* Jason Cunliffe <[jasonic--nomadics--org]> [040808 09:36]:
> Hi > > Does anyone here have Ruby experience?
Do not in practical terms, but I did buy a couple of books, and read up on it from a research perspective.
> If so, I would very much appreciate any thoughts you have about Ruby from a > Rebol perspective.
see below...
> At first glance it seems to be halfway between Python and REBOL.
My impression was that the syntax was influenced by perl and the object oriented schema was influenced by smalltalk and was probably as close to smalltalk's *very* OOP approach. Many smalltalk programmers consider smalltalk to be the 'original' OOP language *and* the best, casting dispersions on 'milder' approaches used by such as C++ and (even 'milder', python) I've noted that ruby shows performance speeds less than perl and python on benchmarks. I wouldn't be surprised if that is a result of the great overhead of message passing, builtin methods and members, etc. In a round-about way, I would compare the stronger OOP methods of python (which I code in about equal percentage of time to rebol) in the following: (and these are my experiences only, of course) It seems to take about 30% more code to do something in python as in rebol, sometimes distinctly more than that, for instance the html rendering resources that I use for python are *way* more verbose than Andrew Martins 'ML dialect, which I use extensively for rebol. On the other hand, the more disciplined approach of python seems (in my experienc) to lend to greater scalability, easier maintenance, and less unexpected effects than rebol.
> Ruby code is short and readable, uses blocks with methods in very direct > powerful manner. > > Why Ruby?
Frankly, ruby's greater reliance and usage of OOP may very well cause it to catch on further as increasing processor speeds make the 'overhead' issue moot. BTW: speaking of OOP approaches, there is a system called "dynace", which is an extension of Ansi C (not C++). It is inspired by CLOS and smalltalk, and uses a custom-built preprocessor. I looked at it a few years ago, before transitioning from C to C++. In retrospect, I wish I'd taken up dynace rather than C++. *Way* less reliance on header files.... My $00.02 worth. tim
> Well I've started using a superb 3D design tool call 'SketchUp' for some > architectural projects.
<<quoted lines omitted: 16>>
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to rebol-request > at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
-- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com

 [4/14] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 8-Aug-2004 20:12


Hi Christian Thanks for your comments.. My only experience with Smalltalk has been indirect -- HMSL, a Smalltalk-inspired computer music language based on ODE, an object-oriented Forth [Yikes its true] running on Amigas. Rebol remands me it plenty. I see Rebol as a forward moving or streaming version of Forth. [reverse reverse polish = forwards streaming]
> Rebol could benefit from a IDE like Smalltalk has since the 60's... An > IDE that is much better than anything currently used by today standard > including Eclipse. Eclipse is a mere shadow of a Smalltalk IDE.
Yes. What features would you like to see ? Today I downloaded several Ruby packages and installations. Friendly one-click installation of the main Windows packcage inlcludes SciTe [Scintilla Text Editor]. You code in left pane [editor w/color syntax], and hit just F5 to open Ruby shell interpretor in right hand pane and run the script. Nice having docs, editor interpreter all in one tool. http://www.scintilla.org/SciTE.html
> Why is that both languages are not commercially successful ?
aah Yes trying to answer that question is well trodden ground by a long road I think ;-) But apart from $$$ marketing, hype, politics and historical luck, I believe the commercial success of the others has much to do with scale of community and richness of libraries, modules and good documentation etc. There appears to be a threshold when languages reach a certain population big enough to survive. I was surprise to read taht Ruby strarted in 1993. Python took a long time to emerge. Like REBOL they are the prodcut of very boirght talented individuals supported by a core cluster of dedicated enthusiasts [prolfiic ealry adopters]. Python is now mainstream and commercially respectable/recognized, but that has only happened in the past 3 years really. I hope Rebol fruits become known for a wider audience soon too. cheers Jason

 [5/14] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 10-Aug-2004 0:55


Hi Tim
> It seems to take about 30% more code to do something in python as in > rebol, sometimes distinctly more than that, for instance the html
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> (in my experienc) to lend to greater scalability, easier maintenance, > and less unexpected effects than rebol.
Thanks.. hmm Yes Python is a bit more verbose, but very consistent. I feel it Python is more widely and reliably 'readable' than Rebol, while Rebol is more fun, more mysterious and more 'writeable'. Looking at Ruby scripts these past few days I find it mainly comes in nice short nuggets and clysters, much more like the visual rhythm of a page of Rebol. Python code tends to be longer except, when in the hands of lucid maestros Alex Martelli. The 'unexpected' effects of Rebol are a side effect of its extraordinary dense power and emergent properties. I don't care personally about he rigor of object oriented or not. Ruby code seems clean and direct, and FUN like much Rebol. Ruby's author Matz appropriated lots of syntax from Perl and was reacting to that. He said in a more recent interview that he felt he got most things right, but had gone perhaps too far in including some of those weird variables. Rebol is wonderfully free of typographic clutter. At first I found the Ruby use of special symbols irritating, yet already I am beginning to find they help readability. Funny how that happens. Now if only I could read Japanese, I could find some real gems out there! Jason

 [6/14] from: moliad:aei:ca at: 10-Aug-2004 2:13


hi all,
> Python is now mainstream and commercially > respectable/recognized, but that has only happened in the past 3 years > really.
Marketing wise, Google and ILM helped a lot in that btw... Morpheus would have for REBOL... that was a sad loss to us IMHO.
> I hope Rebol fruits become known for a wider audience soon too.
I think the rebol collaboration (aka devcon), is going to help the RT and the community A LOT in order to align everyone on the same path. There is nothing like shaking someone's hand and looking into their eyes, to get a measure of their strenght of character. really, just by having everyone from around the world, meeting in the same setting, will help REBOL as a whole. You will basically have many of us who've been chatting for several years working on tools together, trading secrets, all reunited in one room... excited and revealing our latest stuff... including Carl and friends from RT. I find it incredible the amount of neural processing power which will be concentrated in such a small space... :-) Anyone who can attend, I truely suggest you do ... you will be able to put faces, voices and character to many of the names you see daily. and you will have people just anxious to answer your questions... especially for novices. If you think you like rebol, attend this conference, and you will know if its for you or not, for sure. -MAx

 [7/14] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 10-Aug-2004 2:44


> really, just by having everyone from around the world, meeting in the same > setting, will help REBOL as a whole. You will basically have many of us
who've
> been chatting for several years working on tools together, trading
secrets, all
> reunited in one room... excited and revealing our latest stuff...
including
> Carl and friends from RT. > > I find it incredible the amount of neural processing power which will be > concentrated in such a small space... :-) > > Anyone who can attend, I truely suggest you do ... you will be able to put > faces, voices and character to many of the names you see daily.
I agree ther is no suibstitute for this kind of meeting. I wish I could attend and meet tou all finally, but I will be in Europe then ... Perhaps a RebolConf in Europe can be organized also soon? If so where and when? Jason

 [8/14] from: gabriele:colellachiara at: 10-Aug-2004 11:39


Hi Jason, On Tuesday, August 10, 2004, 8:44:32 AM, you wrote: JC> Perhaps a RebolConf in Europe can be organized also soon? There will be one in Paris in October I think; however, I don't think the people going to the DevCon in Davis will be able to be there too. I hope we can do the 2005 DevCon in Europe, maybe in Italy. :-) Regards, Gabriele. -- Gabriele Santilli <[g--santilli--tiscalinet--it]> -- REBOL Programmer Amiga Group Italia sez. L'Aquila --- SOON: http://www.rebol.it/

 [9/14] from: tim:johnsons-web at: 10-Aug-2004 8:07


* Jason Cunliffe <[jasonic--nomadics--org]> [040809 21:07]:
> Hi Tim > > It seems to take about 30% more code to do something in python as in
<<quoted lines omitted: 9>>
> I feel it Python is more widely and reliably 'readable' than Rebol, while > Rebol is more fun, more mysterious and more 'writeable'.
Rebol can and *should* always be just as readable as python. In fact in my "shop" it *will* be so. :-) Perl has also be refered to as "write-only", but because of rebol's more flexible syntax, we don't need to fall into that trap.
> The 'unexpected' effects of Rebol are a side effect of its extraordinary > dense power and emergent properties.
And for the uninitiated, the trade-off is this: Would you rather write do_something(record["First_name"]) ## python OR do-something First_Name ;; rebol loads word ;; automagically from query
> I don't care personally about he rigor of object oriented or not. Ruby code > seems clean and direct, and FUN like much Rebol.
I like python's builtin special methods, one *could* pattern that in rebol without building it into the basic syntax.... Two things that I *would* like to see done with rebol is 1)Enable 'protect'ing of object members 2)Writing to the stand error handle. Now that's weird that rebol won't do that!
> Ruby's author Matz appropriated lots of syntax from Perl and was reacting to > that.
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
> Funny how that happens. Now if only I could read Japanese, I could find some > real gems out there!
And when it comes to programming, the translator pages are not much help at all. I tried translating the documentation for one of the rebol server page docs from French, and I couldn't understand the english translation at all! (and no fault of the french). Limitation of word-for-word translation. (tim (majored-in: philosophy-of-language)) -- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com

 [10/14] from: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 10-Aug-2004 18:29


Hi Tim, you wrote: ....
> 2)Writing to the stand error handle. Now that's weird that > rebol won't do that! >
What do you mean? -L

 [11/14] from: lmecir:mbox:vol:cz at: 10-Aug-2004 18:43


Ladislav Mecir napsal(a):
>Hi Tim, >you wrote:
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
>What do you mean? >-L
No need to answer, I was too quick hitting send -L

 [12/14] from: jasonic:nomadics at: 10-Aug-2004 12:52


Hi Gabriele
> There will be one in Paris in October I think; however, I don't > think the people going to the DevCon in Davis will be able to be > there too.
Thanks. Do you have any info on the Paris event?
> I hope we can do the 2005 DevCon in Europe, maybe in Italy. :-)
mm.. Nice idea ! - Jason

 [13/14] from: tim:johnsons-web at: 10-Aug-2004 10:05


* Ladislav Mecir <[lmecir--mbox--vol--cz]> [040810 08:37]:
> Hi Tim, > you wrote:
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> > > What do you mean?
<grin> I meant "standard error handle". Am I wrong? Can rebol/core write to stderr? My apologies for the spelling error. tim -- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com

 [14/14] from: stasil213:yaho:o at: 10-Aug-2004 21:48


Jason wrote... Does anyone here have Ruby experience? If so, I would very much appreciate any thoughts you have about Ruby from a Rebol perspective. At first glance it seems to be halfway between Python and REBOL. Ruby code is short and readable, uses blocks with methods in very direct powerful manner. === Here is the slanted view of a long-time old-fogey Smalltalk programmer (me) who is dabbling with Rebol while searching for his next language... === Smalltalk, Forth, Tcl, LISP, Logo, and Rebol seem to be "special paradigm" languages. Being object, stack, string, or list based (respectively), they have a very simple basic syntax that allows most of the language to be written in the language, including control structures. They have devoted supporters (including me), but the special paradigms can lead to non-standard syntax. Perl, Ruby, and Rebol seem to be consciously thrown-together "collections of what works" or "best practices" languages. Rebol is unique in that it comes across both as a "special paradigm" language with a very simple basic syntax, and also as a "collection of what works" language, based on Carl's years of experience rather than some academic principle. Smalltalk and LISP are huge and bloated "image" based languages, and can't talk easily to the world outside of their images. The rest are file based. Perl, Python, Ruby, and Tcl seem to be popular scripting languages, with large followings and many downloadable add-in modules. Smalltalk, LISP, and Ruby are fully object oriented. Python is moving (the migration is well thought out) to being fully OO. Rebol and Perl are sort of OO. Standard Tcl and Forth are not. Linux, Python, Ruby, and Rebol are guided by one genius. I think this is good. Smalltalk stagnated in 1980, when the original Xerox Parc team stopped development. Perl and Tcl were guided by one genius, but seem to be drifting toward being guided by committee !!?? (this is my personal opinion only) Smalltalk has a great IDE. None of the other languages come close. === For personal programming, I am going with Rebol for now because it is fun, interesting, and does lots of web stuff easily. If I were at a normal, existing business, I would go with Python or Ruby, because they are more mainstream, I like OO, they have lots of add-in modules, and they are still guided by one individual. If I were a small start up, I might take a gamble on Rebol, if I figured out a way it could make me lots of money. === ???!!!??? Single programmers write languages for that are great for single programmers. Teams of programmers don't write languages very well. ???!!!??? ==== --Stan

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted