faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
|
Ruby, oh Ruby
by unnamed man on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @08:04
|
| Geesh, I would love to see updated versions of Ruby/Qt and Ruby/KDE and sweep away all of those Python and Perl crowds ;D |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by ac on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @09:20
|
Ruby bindings have been updated to 0.15, look in the app box to the right.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by unnamed man on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @10:47
|
Nope, they aren't updated. They appear in apps.kde.com as updated 'cause it is the first time they are added to the apps index. They are still for KDE 1.x and Qt 2.0.x
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by Richard Dale on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @11:38
|
"look in the app box to the right"
What's this then? Sounds like an adventure game to me :)
Which version of Qt/KDE does the 0.15 release of the Ruby bindings relate to? As far as I know Nobuyuki Horie hasn't updated the bindings for the last six months.
I've added a Ruby bindings code generation option to the kalyptus bindings generation utility - usage 'kalyptus -fruby <qt/kde headers>'. It needs a bit more work (maybe only a week or so to add method overloading code generation), but then it should be much easier to keep up to date than maintaining SWIG interface files.
-- Richard
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by Neil Stevens on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @12:22
|
The Ruby bindings were done with SWIG ( http://www.swig.org/ ) , which doesn't exactly automate the process of writing wrappers around C++ code.
I really doubt bindings will be able to keep up with KDE unless something more efficient comes along.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by Evan "JabberWokky" E. on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @13:20
|
It seems to be that something could be drawn from one of the indexing programs such as lxr. (http://lxr.kde.org/) which automatically parses the classes in KDE. Failing that, the documentation is kept in a structured format, so bindings could be autogenerated from that information, complete with documentation for the bindings.
--
Evan
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by Adam Treat on Sunday 17/Mar/2002, @13:32
|
What you've just described is Kalyptus. It is a modification of KDoc by Richard Dale, and it is excellent. Basically, all of these bindings (Java, C, Objective-C, C#, and perl) are drawn from Richard Dale's work. Look a few posts above and you will find that Richard is working on some new Ruby bindings as we speak.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by NameSuggesterEngine on Monday 18/Mar/2002, @16:27
|
Since it took the person who wrote Ruby bindings for GNUStep only about a day to do it (he didn't know anything aobut GNUStep and was a newbie to ruby) how long can it take to write Ruby Qt ... an hour?
Oh yeah I forgot KDE/Qt is C++ ... blech :-)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by dc on Monday 18/Mar/2002, @20:24
|
yeah, but kdec/qtc is C :P
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Ruby, oh Ruby
by Richard Dale on Tuesday 19/Mar/2002, @01:30
|
KDE has language bindings for dynamic languages like Objective-C or Java, so it should be possible to write a dynamic bridge to those languages like the Ruby/GNUstep one (or even use the same code). I think JPython should work well with the Java bindings.
But it isn't that much effort to write static bindings, once you don't have to prepare heroic amounts of SWIG interfaces by hand.
-- Richard
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
