On Thu, 3 May 2001, Robert Feldt wrote: > On Thu, 3 May 2001, David Alan Black wrote: > > > It feels like a lot of Ruby energy gets dissipated, in the absence of > > some way to harness this realm of code. Of course we can all > > cut-and-paste good code from ruby-talk -- and maybe it will turn out > > that any other approach ends up just being a fancy way to achieve more > > or less that effect. But I do wonder whether there's some more > > systematic way to leverage the (to me) sometimes startlingly powerful > > little language enhancements and extensions that get thrown around. > > Some way for very small, even tiny, libraries and tweakings to travel, > > almost style-sheet-like, with larger bodies of code. Or something. > > > > I know I'm starting to dovetail with other discussions (raa.succ, > > ideas about dynamic library retrieval, etc.), and indeed all of this > > flows into the same stream. I just keep coming back to this > > particular take on it, which I think is potentially quite important. > > > I've taken the view that rubygarden.com would solvemany of these issues > and I thought you were one of its developers. Would this mail indicate > that rubygarden has different goals or means or simply that the > development of it has come to a halt? Would be a shame... I think that rubygarden (a term which went through various shades of meaning, but now is pretty much synonymous with the wiki of that name) is a great resource, but it doesn't exactly match what I mean. Or, to clarify, there are discussions and comments there that do relate to what I mean, but the wiki itself is not what I mean. If you see what I mean. (And yes, I am one of its developers. My main contribution is the term "Ruby Garden" :-) The same is true of Colin's Ruby Cookbook. These are very useful things, but what I'm clumsily groping for is something that has more to do with actual code production and execution. David -- David Alan Black home: dblack / candle.superlink.net work: blackdav / shu.edu Web: http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav