Erik Veenstra wrote:
>>I'm having a hard time, then picturing a concrete use for
>>this.
> 
> 
> Hmmm... I made it because I had concrete use for it. Not the
> other way aroung...


Lots of stuff happens that way.

> 
> An example. My boss expects me to program on his IBM mainframe.
> That's where he pays me for. Nowadays, 3270-emulators are used
> as terminals, instead of the good old green screens... Big Blue
> gave us HLLAPI (High Level Language API), which is a way to 
> program the interaction with the emulator, although the
> emulator still thinks it's a human-being that is in control.
> Over the years, I made a lot of scripts to cope with tests,
> quick downloads, ditto upload, log filtering, etc. My
> colleagues are not stupid and say "That's nice! Can I have it."
> So they need Ruby, but not necessarily a full blown
> installation. Besides that, it's not possible to install
> anything on our machines. There's not much more than a network
> share and a tempdir. So I bound .rb to H:\allinoneruby.exe ...

H: is the network share, and H:\allinoneruby.exe works better than 
H:\ruby\bin\ruby.exe ?


> 
> 
>>Can you give some examples where this works better than, say,
>>exerb?
> 
> 
> Did I say it was better?... 

Not that I'm aware of.  I would hazard a guess, though, that if you use 
AllInOneRuby instead of exerb then you might think it was better, at 
least for some specific tasks.  So I was curious what those tasks might be.

 > At least, it's simpler...

That's not clear to me, but I gather at this point I should go try it 
myself.

Thanks.


James
>