Jari Williamsson wrote:
> Mohit Sindhwani wrote:
>
>> I changed the C++ there to "C" and then it works fine.  I also had to 
>> remark out one of the lines in missing.h because it seems that one of 
>> the definitions there is now not missing :)
>
> Is there any such thing as extern "C++"? This must be a mistake in the 
> sources?

I think it's an error - it's in win32.h - I found an earlier link that 
had stumbled across this as a problem.  But, in that person's case, 
changing it back didn't solve the problem.  Anyway, it works for me now.

>>> Anyway, bcc version ruby is almost dead now, and may be
>>> deprecated in the future.
>>>   
>>
>> I hope not!  Again, thanks for the tips!
>
> I also hope not. C++Builder (or as the current name, Developer Studio) 
> is an excellent RAD tool, and for the occasional apps that needs Ruby 
> scripting it would be great if everything works. A couple of years 
> ago, I had to use it Ruby in a C++ Builder project, googled about it 
> and every discussion thread I searched about it ended in a kind of 
> "uncertain" state. So I finally ended up building a custom DLL wrapper 
> to the one-click version of the Ruby DLL library instead. Very 
> time-consuming, since I had to re-prototype every Ruby C function I 
> needed.


I completely agree that Developer Studio does have a lot of good things and
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jari Williamsson
>
>

I've started an article to write about the process of embedding Ruby 
into Borland C++ Builder which I shall put on my blog at: 
http://notepad.onghu.com/2008/1/2/codegear-turbo-c-and-ruby - and will 
jot down the notes as I go through the process.  I think I'm keen to see 
C++ Builder survive and I love Ruby - together, they can do some 
fantastic things (rapid development, rapid development!)

Cheers
Mohit.