-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Perrin [mailto:code / apotheon.net]=20
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 4:12 PM
To: ruby-talk ML
Subject: Re: What editor or IDE do you use?

> Ruby has proven to have nowhere near that kind of difficulty associated w=
ith=20
> its use, for me.  This is one reason of many that I like it.  I can use a=
 vi-
> like editor, focusing on writing and editing code rather than on getting =
the=20
> editor to write the scaffolding and boilerplate I need, and to help me lo=
ok=20
> up complex chunks of code needed to achieve basic functionality.

[snip]
I strongly agree there, Chad. Last fall I built an entire target stimulatio=
n environment with a full wxWidgets GUI that launched half a dozen extra pr=
ocesses for target instrumentation through telnet that talked through share=
d memory, and I never once missed a debugger. Whole thing was edited with S=
ciTE. Ruby just is too easy to figure out. :)

Now I'm being forced into C++, and I just can't do it without a full debugg=
er. As good as Eclipse is, I find myself really missing the class-browsing =
tools I had with Smalltalk 20 years ago. C++ is really difficult to keep fr=
om straying into syntactic nightmares, especially when they're somebody els=
e's syntax. THAT's where you need a really top-shelf IDE.

About the only tool I'd like to have for Ruby over and above basic editing =
is a refactoring class browser; that'd be a nice tool to have. OTT just a s=
eamlessly slick little editor and I'm happy. Any of the aforementioned will=
 do.

Which is why I REALLY want to get Ruby ported to my little target, so if an=
yone has a clue as to how I can get past the little linker bugaboo that has=
 make failing to pass a symbol file name to ld...