Hi,

hipster wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Jul 2000  23:05:18 -0500, Conrad Schneiker wrote:
> [snip]
> > What I have in mind is RIG-IT, the Ruby's Integrating GUI-based
> > Innovator's Toolkit. (Although the program name is rigit, I write it
> > rig-it to reflect its intended pronunciation, which in turn reflects the
> > intended purpose of helping new users to rapidly rig up useful tasks to
> > demonstrate the utility of Ruby to their co-workers and managers) The
> > idea of rig-it is to provide an interface to let users view, run, copy,
> > clone, and customize lots of useful code examples (i.e. the same sort of
> > stuff that I was thinking of putting into the Ruby Cookbook FAQ, if I
> > ever got around to it). Think of rig-it as an executable demo FAQ that
> > is designed and commented to help you to easily customize it for your
> > own purposes. This same framework could also serve as a hybrid GUI/shell
> > for launching user programs/scripts. By judiciously modifying rig-it
> > itself (or another copy thereof), many fairly mundane but common sorts
> > of programming/scripting tasks could readily be developed, with a
> > tolerable GUI for their non-programming end-user clients to use.
> >
> > Any thoughts or comments?
>
> I'm thinking about a kind of (GUI driven) repository containing (links
> to) code snippets, classes, modules, documentation etc. from the
> standard libraries, others and yourself. It could retrieve new
> components from the RAA (protocol to be defined) and send your own
> components to it; a kind of CRAN, as discussed earlier on this list.
> Version control would be a requirement, enabling `cvs update' like
> functionality with user specified granularity. (This would benefit from
> an hierarchical setup of modules and components e.g.: ruby.lang.*,
> ruby.net.*, ruby.util.thread, etc.)

Well, that certainly seems like a great idea.

I'd like to figure out how to start with something much simpler (so that I
would actually get started), yet allow for developments like that without
having to redo everything later.

> Given Ruby's ability for introspection a kind of `RubyBean' assembler
> comes to mind for the design/programming bit. A UML-like graphical
> representation of class lattices would be really cuspy...

I'm not familiar with JavaBeans, although them seem like a powerful tool. Does
anyone have any detailed ideas for RubyBean architecture?

--
Conrad Schneiker
(This note is unofficial and subject to improvement without notice.)