ryan.raaum / gmail.com wrote:
> Patrick Hurley wrote:
> > On 8/23/06, ryan.raaum / gmail.com <ryan.raaum / gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Also, it is important to ask if you are on windows or linux/bsd/mac os
> > > x.  It is significantly harder to extend ruby on windows than on one of
> > > the unixy systems.
> >
> > Not really. It is significantly harder to build libraries designed for
> > unixy systems under windows than on those unixy systems. But the Ruby
> > interface to C/C++ is pretty much identical between platforms. Why do
> > you say it is harder?
>
> Because ruby is unix focussed.  All the core ruby developers are unix
> people.  The ruby toolchain is a unix-oriented toolchain (see the
> recent 100+ message thread about ruby on windows).
>
> To build on windows, one must either build ruby from scratch using
> mingw (a topic of some contention and basically a unix toolset for
> windows) or have vc6, which is less than readily available if you don't
> already have it.  Ruby does not build easily in currently available
> microsoft tools.
>
> Starting from scratch, on a vanilla unix system, anyone with reasonable
> unix and c knowledge can build ruby and a (minimal) custom extension in
> well under an hour.
>
> Starting from scratch, on a vanilla windows system, I would be amazed
> if a windows guru could build ruby and a custom extension in under a
> full working day.

Qualifying my own post.  Using mingw - slightly longer than on unix
allowing for the time needed to install mingw.  Using microsoft tools -
much more difficult.

> 
> > 
> > pth