[ANN} Komodo 3.5.1 -- a professional Ruby IDE
Curt Hibbs
3.5.1<http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo/>,
an IDE for dynamic languages. This version fully supports Ruby on all
platforms (the previous version was not available on Windows). I just
blogged about it here:
http://blog.curthibbs.us/articles/2005/12/01/activestate-releases-ruby-ide
Curt
Christer Nilsson
login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
Komodo User's Guide says:
Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
a standalone ruby program.
Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
Christer
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Ezra Zygmuntowicz
Thats just the way it works. It takes forever between page loads
because it has to load the rails framework, your rails app and
webrick all into the debugger so its just slow. The whole debugger is
pure ruby so the results you are getting are to be expected. They are
talking about rewriting the debugger in C to increase the speed though.
Cheers-
-Ezra Zygmuntowicz
Yakima Herald-Republic
WebMaster
http://yakimaherald.com
509-577-7732
ez...@yakima-herald.com
frugalprogrammer
not the case anymore? Or only in PHP and not Ruby?
Curt Hibbs
>
> I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
Yes, I noticed this, too... running programs in debug mode is slow (slower
than the debugger in ArachnoRuby or Eclipse/RDT). I'm not sure why, though.
Komodo User's Guide says:
>
> Ruby on Rails applications can be debugged locally or remotely just like
> any other ruby application. However, since much of the Rails framework
> has to run within the debugger, the process is normally slower than with
> a standalone ruby program.
>
> Will it execute faster using a remote debugger?
I haven't tried this, I wouldn't expect it to be any faster.
Curt
Curt Hibbs
It does this in Ruby, too. But only if it knows what the type/class of a
variable is. So if I have
test = Array.new
temp = "test string"
You'll get the code assist on these two variables. But if all you have is:
def my_method(value)
end
You won't get code assist on "value".
Curt
Christer Nilsson
What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
Radrails is quite good, but still lacks the debugger. And it's really
random trying to start the server.
Is it really necessary for Komodo to try to debug ALL of the librarys ?
Curt Hibbs
> What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
Komodo, ArachnoRuby, Eclipse/RDT, FreeRIDE. There's probably more, but these
are the ones I know about.
Curt
Wayne Vucenic
> I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
I'd give ArachnoRuby a try: http://www.ruby-ide.com
(there's a 30 day free trial version.)
It's by far the fastest Ruby debugger I've seen. I've used it to do
Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
Curt Hibbs
>
> Hi Christer,
>
> > I've tried it on Win XP. It's terribly slow, one minute just to see my
> > login form. Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected ?
>
> I'd give ArachnoRuby a try: http://www.ruby-ide.com
> (there's a 30 day free trial version.)
>
> It's by far the fastest Ruby debugger I've seen. I've used it to do
> Rails debugging, and it runs quickly enough to be quite usable.
I can confirm that the ArachnoRuby debugger is faster than Komodo's debugger
(all the other stuff is about the same speed).
Curt
Christer Nilsson
I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !
Debugging with ArachnoRuby seems to be about 50% slower than direct
execution, which is completely acceptable.
Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby. Their web page wasn't
very convincing, but the numbers above are.
Curt Hibbs
speed difference.
Curt
Wayne Vucenic
On 12/6/05, Christer Nilsson <janchrist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I compared ArachnoRuby with Komodo, using my solution for RubyQuiz #57.
> ArachnoRuby was 197 times faster !
>
> Thank you Wayne, for pointing out ArachnoRuby.
You're very welcome!
>Their web page wasn't very convincing, but the numbers above are.
I believe ArachnoRuby development is currently focused on enhancing
the product rather than doing PR/Website stuff. So the product is
excellent, but the website doesn't fully convey that.
I think I've tried every Ruby IDE available on Windows (including some
lesser known ones like Mondrian), and ArachnoRuby is what I've chosen
to use.
I earn (part of) my living programming in Ruby, and I simply wouldn't
be able to do much of this work without ArachnoRuby. Sometimes in my
work I have a Ruby script that takes an hour to run, which gets some
weird error near the end of the run. Before ArachnoRuby I simply
couldn't debug these scripts, as in the other debuggers it would have
taken days to get to the point of reproducing the error. So there
were many projects I couldn't even attempt in Ruby, because I knew
that if I had a problem I might not be able to effectively debug it.
I've been using ArachroRuby for well over a year. Sometimes I use it
8+ hours a day, 5+ days a week. It's never let me down. It is still
in beta, so there are occasional glitches, but they're pretty minor.
It used to crash at times (that's become pretty infrequent lately),
but when this happened I'd just restart it. It would automatically
re-open the files I'd had open, and I'd pick up where I left off. I
only lost code I'd typed once or twice, and this was never more than a
line or so. Not a big deal.
Two of the features I like a lot are the Ruby Gems browser (Tools
menu, then "Ruby Gems Browser...") which makes RubyGems so much easier
to work with than the usual command line tools,
and the Ruby Class browser (Tools menu, then "Ruby Class
Browser..."). Currently the class browser only works with the classes
in Ruby and in the standard library, but in the future you'll be able
to add your own classes to it.
(I have no financial or other connection with ArachnoRuby, except as a
_very_ satisfied user and beta tester.)
Wayne
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
Hank Gong
What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
bad...
Most important thing is that it's free!!!
Hank
Wayne Vucenic
On 12/6/05, Hank Gong <hank...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, did you try the Ruby editor RDE?
> What's your feeling with that? Currently I'm using RDE, I think it's not
> bad...
Yes, I used RDE for a year or more before ArachnoRuby was available.
It was OK for its time, but the debugger was just soooo slooooow. It
was RDE that I was using when in my earlier post I mentioned there
were projects that I just couldn't do in Ruby because I wouldn't be
able to debug them.
When ArachnoRuby came out I switched from RDE and I've never regretted it.
Florian Groß
>>I'm looking forward to your comparison, Curt.
>>What debuggers are available at the moment, for Ruby and for Rails ?
>
> Komodo, ArachnoRuby, Eclipse/RDT, FreeRIDE. There's probably more, but these
> are the ones I know about.
What about ruby-breakpoint? There's no graphical front end just yet, but
I would still consider it a debugger. :)
basi
tells you if the line is syntactically malformed (sometimes too
eagerly!) and you fix the line before compilingt Saves time. At this
point, this is ArachnoRuby's selling point for me. When it reaches 1.0,
and I'm convinced Ruby is my next programming language (and it looks
like that is becoming a certainty -- the user group is outstandingly
helpful and very knowledgeable!), I'll get me a registered copy.
basi
Curt Hibbs
Yes, this is a nice feature. It should be noted that Eclipse/RDT and Komodo
both do this as well.
Curt
Hank Gong
Could you tell me how big was your program? RDE can not handle it because
the debug speed is too slow?
Hank
On 12/7/05, Wayne Vucenic <night...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Christer Nilsson
I agree with your comment on Arachno. It's amazing that one person,
Lothar, can achieve so much.
Could you please explain slimeline and debugger quick mode ?
Have you tried Arachno in a Rails project ?
Mark Ericson
(like IDEA or Eclipse in the Java world). It would be great to ctrl-click
on a variable or function call and open up the source to that call in a new
window.
Is that perhaps already in the product and I've missed it?
Bennett, Patrick
You can use Search->Lookup selection, but it's nothing more than an
automatic cross-project grep.
While it is a *very* nice feature, I agree, Arachno Ruby definitely
needs more Ruby smarts and the ability to jump instantly to a
method/class definition.
Patrick Bennett
Wayne Vucenic
> Could you please explain slimeline and debugger quick mode ?
slimeline mode is for conserving screen real estate, especially on 1024x768
monitors. It has options to hide the tabs at the sides of the window, and
to hide various other UI elements, to give the maximum amount of space to
the main window. It's a nice idea, but personally I don't use it even on my
1024x768 laptop because I really like seeing all the tools and other UI
elements.
The default debugger mode is quick mode, in which it doesn't have as much
information about stack frames other than the current one. I don't believe
this has any effect when you're debugging in the current stack frame. It
only makes a difference when you use the debugger to navigate to
previous stack frames (that is, the method that called the current method,
or earlier callers.) When quick mode is turned off, the debugger runs
slower, but it gets more information on previous stack frames. (I hope
I got this right... Lothar explained this to me once, and this is my
understanding of what he said.) In practice I don't pay a lot of attention
to whether or not I'm in quick mode. Non-quick mode doesn't seem to
slow the debugger down that much (at least for small programs), but then
again I haven't noticed a huge amount of difference in the info I get on
previous stack frames.
> Have you tried Arachno in a Rails project ?
I do all my Rails work in Arachno, since it's such a great environment.
I've done some Rails debugging in Arachno, using both of the techniques
described at:
http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pages/How+To+Use+Arachno+Ruby+IDE+with+Rails
I haven't done a ton of Rails debugging, mostly because I don't need a
debugger for most of my Rails work, but when I have debugged Rails
programs in Arachno it's been plenty fast.
Take care,
Wayne
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
Christer Nilsson
I tried Debugger Quick and Slow mode. No difference. Same speed. Local
variables and parameters available on all the stack frames. Maybe this
feature is used in the other languages supported: Perl, PHP and Python
Slimeline is not so interesting on my 1600 x 1200 display. Good news
that Rails works well on ArachnoRuby. I've chipped in USD129 to Lothar
Thanks for the link!
Patrick Hurley
> I've been playing with Arachno and wish it had hyper navigation of the code
> (like IDEA or Eclipse in the Java world). It would be great to ctrl-click
> on a variable or function call and open up the source to that call in a new
> window.
I do not think this is in the current editor. In any case it would not
be possible to get right all of the time -- but it would be possible
to get right most of the time and would be a nice feature. Within a
file the navigator pane shows all of your normally defined methods
(and a nice fly over documentation window as well).
pth
Wayne Vucenic
> I tried Debugger Quick and Slow mode. No difference.
Thanks for the data point. I didn't do any explicit tests, but I didn't really
notice a difference between the two modes.
> Thanks for the link!
You're very welcome. Actually, I also sent you this link yesterday in a
private email. Maybe it got caught in your spam filter or something.
Let me know if you didn't get that email, and I'll resend it.
Alexandru Popescu
except one aspect: the promise on the site about releases. I haven't
seen an update for a while, and I would expect at least some
feedback/estimations about this.
cheers,
/alex
--
w( the_mindstorm )p.
Wayne Vucenic
> Could you tell me how big was your program?
The Ruby program was only a few hundred lines, but it took a long while
to run because it was processing 5 million lines of text contained in
tens of thousands of files, and it was running on a 500MHz Pentium III.
> RDE can not handle it because the debug speed is too slow?
That's correct. It was getting an error after about an hour of running
(without the debugger). RDE's debugger is so slow that it probably
would have taken days to reach that point if I ran in the debugger.
Take care,
Wayne Vucenic
> I am a user of Arachno for quite a while and I am quite happy with it,
> except one aspect: the promise on the site about releases. I haven't
> seen an update for a while
Yes, it would be nice to see a new release. I had an email exchange with
Lothar a while ago, and he was deeply into making some major changes
to the code. (He told me what he was working on, but since it
was a private conversation I won't repeat what he said.)
As someone who's considered writing and marketing a program myself,
I can empathize with having to simultaneously do design/development/
marketing/support/etc/etc/etc.
I'm always glad to see the new features Lothar puts in, but the
current version of Arachno is 100% usable for my day-to-day work.
Jeff Wood
a bit less stable than I'd prefer, but Lothar is hard @ work on making the
foundation of the application more solid...
He's done a really good job with Arachno ... and I can't wait for the next
release ...
Just before the release he had started working on scriptability for the
environment ... ( to allow external custom scripts be able to interact with
the software ) ... and he had added some nice auto templates and electric
braces ...
All of which I love ... it really is a GOOD environment.
j.
On 12/7/05, Wayne Vucenic <night...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
--
"Remember. Understand. Believe. Yield! -> http://ruby-lang.org"
Jeff Wood
zdennis
> You can use Search->Lookup selection, but it's nothing more than an
> automatic cross-project grep.
> While it is a *very* nice feature, I agree, Arachno Ruby definitely
> needs more Ruby smarts and the ability to jump instantly to a
> method/class definition.
This isn't a ArachnoRuby thing persay, but it applies to any up and coming ruby IDE.... how would
you as the user expect the IDE to take you to a class definition, if the class itself is
defined/opened in multiple files?
Zach
Christer Nilsson
Why not show all the code snippets, that defines the class?
Bennett, Patrick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: zdennis [mailto:zde...@mktec.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 7:12 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: ArachnoRuby -- a professional Ruby IDE
>
> This isn't a ArachnoRuby thing persay, but it applies to any
> up and coming ruby IDE.... how would you as the user expect
> the IDE to take you to a class definition, if the class
> itself is defined/opened in multiple files?
I never said it would be easy. ;)
SlickEdit pops a dialog where you can pick the appropriate instance if
there are multiple matches.
In C++, definition vs. implementation for e.g.
In the case of Ruby, if there was only one class XXX reference, it
should simply jump there.
If the class was re-opened and referenced multiple times, it could just
show the different locations where it was referenced and let you choose.
Patrick Bennett
Eric Promislow
relatively
slow. We originally wrote the debugger in pure Ruby, and found
debugging
large programs was very slow. We're shipping a version where a couple
of
the bottlenecks were rewritten in C, but that has revealed other
bottlenecks.
One thing I should point out is that the Komodo Ruby debugger works
with
any installed version > 1.8.0. We don't silo our own interpreter, so
whatever the
debugger says your code is doing, that's what it will most likely do
when
deployed. On the other hand, there is a fundamental speed-up I'd like
to do,
but it requires working with the API as of 1.8.3. At that point it
seems to make
sense to offer our own embedded interpreter optimized for faster
debugging,
but this falls in the thinking-out-loud category at this point.
- Eric
Curt Hibbs
Thanks for enlightening us, Eric.
Curt
jus...@zeusedit.com
> up and coming ruby IDE.... how would you as the user expect
> the IDE to take you to a class definition, if the class itself
> is defined/opened in multiple files?
The Zeus for Windows IDE handles this case by displaying dialog
box containing a list of the files and letting the user decide.
Zeus automatically manages the ctags information for all files
contained in the currently open workspace and it this information
that it uses for things like tag search, class browsing and
intellisensing.
Jussi Jumppanen
Author: Zeus for Windows Programmer's IDE
http://www.zeusedit.com
Ron Jeffries
documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
And I sure wish some of these projects would pick up on the Agile / XP thing of
releasing solid code every week. It's not really that hard to do ...
It does look interesting, thanks for the folks who posted about it.
--
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm giving the best advice I have. You get to decide if it's true for you.
tsum...@tsumelabs.com
> Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
> documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
Perhaps a waste of time to some people, but documentation comes very good to
new people who want to program ruby. I think Lothar has forgotten what its
like to be a new programmer.
Tsume
Ron Jeffries
Or even an old programmer who would like to know how to use Arachno well.
Patrick Hurley
> On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:39:34 +0900, tsum...@tsumelabs.com wrote:
>
> >On Sunday 11 December 2005 11:02 am, Ron Jeffries wrote:
> >> Arachno seems nice at a quick glance. I don't agree with Lothar that
> >> documentation would be a "waste of time", but it's his deal.
> >
> >Perhaps a waste of time to some people, but documentation comes very good to
> >new people who want to program ruby. I think Lothar has forgotten what its
> >like to be a new programmer.
>
> Or even an old programmer who would like to know how to use Arachno well.
I understand what you guys are saying, but if given the choice between
docs about the editor and a working Ruby macros with even a couple of
examples -- I know which I would pick.
pth
soxinbox
to invest both the time to figure out the editor without documentation, and
also pay for the product. I am willing to do either, but not both. After
using Arachno for the trial period, I am convinced it is a very good
product. I may decide to purchase in the future, but up till now, I can't
bring myself to pay $80 for an undocumented product.
Perhaps Lothar could trade free copies for documentation.
Some may have spotted the irony that I have already spent the time to learn
the tool, and would now not need the documentation. I am just stuborn that
way.
And just to reiterate, this is a great editor, and should be considered by
anyone that is developing ruby professionaly or can convince some corperate
behemoth to pay for it.
Wayne Vucenic
Actually, it's US $59, with volume discounts starting at 2 licenses.
Wayne
---
Wayne Vucenic
No Bugs Software
"Ruby and C++ Agile Contract Programming in Silicon Valley"
tony summerfelt
> to invest both the time to figure out the editor without documentation,
"figure it out"
i'm productive with both komodo and arachno-ruby...i didn't need to
figure anything out. i just used it.
granted, it wasn't 2 hours before a major project was due that i fired
up one of them and decided i needed to learn them as i was fnishing up
code...
i find both komodo and arachnoruby relatively intuitive. took me a few
minutes to get comfortable with each.
i'm sure if lothar gets annoyed enough at answering questions that
should in documentation he might release something...i'd much prefer
arachnoruby gets worked on before any time is spent on the docs...
and
> also pay for the product. I am willing to do either, but not both. After
> using Arachno for the trial period, I am convinced it is a very good
> product. I may decide to purchase in the future, but up till now, I can't
> bring myself to pay $80 for an undocumented product.
> Perhaps Lothar could trade free copies for documentation.
>
> Some may have spotted the irony that I have already spent the time to learn
> the tool, and would now not need the documentation. I am just stuborn that
> way.
>
> And just to reiterate, this is a great editor, and should be considered by
> anyone that is developing ruby professionaly or can convince some corperate
> behemoth to pay for it.
>
>
>
>
--
http://home.cogeco.ca/~tsummerfelt1
telnet://ventedspleen.dyndns.org
Christer Nilsson
>i'm productive with both komodo and arachno-ruby...
tony,
can you tell as about any debugger speed differences between komodo and
arachno?
what reasons do you see for using both?
christer
Jeff Wood
IDE debuggers...
j.
Peter Ertl
arachno:
last update: August(!)
status: at most beta
documentation: close to non-existent
rails-support: hidden but there
komodo:
ruby support: very rudimentary, just to say "we can do ruby",
probably initiated by marketing wussies
rails support: err, say what?
TextMate:
mac-os-only *aarg*
On Windows, I suggest (and use)
with
http://sourceforge.net/projects/rubyeclipse
and
http://www.eclipse.org/webtools
What you guys use?
Regards
Peter
> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: Jeff Wood <jeff.da...@gmail.com>
> An: ruby...@ruby-lang.org (ruby-talk ML)
> Betreff: Re: ArachnoRuby -- a professional Ruby IDE
> Datum: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 02:57:00 +0900
tony summerfelt
> can you tell as about any debugger speed differences between komodo and
> arachno?
i much prefer the debugger in arachnoruby. i often need to debug
threads and it's a breeze using the arachnoruby debugger for that. and
of course it's faster. i found ruby thread debugging in komodo a bit
confusing, but it's entirely possible that i'm too used to using
arachnoruby for that
> what reasons do you see for using both?
for myself i also write perl and tcl/tk code and komodo is one stop
shopping there. i had komodo registered before the full ruby support
was added.
if i was only writing in ruby i'd would use arachnoruby exclusively.
and even though it's still an early release it's completely usable
for me...
Gene Tani
agreed, if you're doing perl, C, python, PHP, java etc you have 6
choices that i know of: vim, emacs, komodo, textmate, jedit and eclipse
in all its variations. Any others?
and agreed on arachno, it works well and if you have serious issues,
Lothar will respond quickly. I get the feeling he doesn't have a lot o
free time to eat donuts and watch Tv, so docs to come. And that's
"slimline" mode, folks.