On Jul 16, 6:43 am, "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <zn... / cesmail.net>
wrote:
> Michael Reiland wrote:

> > 2. Databases - contemplating using ActiveRecord, but I would like to use
> > ODBC to support multiple types of DB's in a uniform way (if you know of
> > alternatives to ODBC or ActiveRecord, please let me know).
>
> unixODBC is a pain in the ass to work with ... there are very few
> free-as-in-freedom drivers. I'd go with ActiveRecord, since it binds to
> Oracle, MS SQL, MySQL, PostgreSQL and SQLite. It's probably not all that
> difficult to extend it to other databases.
QtRuby works well with ActiveRecord. I've included a couple of classes
in the latest 1.4.9 release under qtruby/rails_support that provide
subclasses Qt::AbstractTableModel and Qt::AbstractItemModel that are
generic, and will work with any ActiveRecord (or ActiveResource)
instance. You can also write you're own custom versions of these
classes and the other Qt model classes to work with ActiveRecord.

> > 3. Binary - Are there any utilities for compiling Ruby into a binary
> > executable?  The issue is twofold, speed, and not handing the customer
> > the source :)
>
> The closest thing is the Zen Obfuscator, I think.
Note that Qt4 QtRuby is GPL only at present, and if you wish to
distribute closed source binaries (not that I'm convinced that is
possible with C Ruby), you would need to make an arrangement with
myself (and I would have to discuss with the other copyright holders).
That may well be a show stopper, but in order to justify a commercial
version of QtRuby I would need to believe there was a critical mass of
paying customers, and I don't see that at present.

You can use WxRuby for commercial development, but I haven't heard of
anyone doing it which would also suggest there isn't sufficient demand
for commercially licensed Ruby GUI bindings.

-- Richard