Please include Scite in ruby installer
steenslag
irb and notepad. Scite provides syntax coloring for ruby, auto-
indentation, multiple open files and a run/stop feature. They have a
550k no-install-just-drop-the-exe here: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/scintilla/Sc203.exe
With a 2 line configuration file (default open with ruby syntax, 2
spaces indent) it works fine. A few registry settings (bind 'edit with
scyte' to .rb and .rbw files with scyte; add to the start menu) and
you're good to go.
Any other simple editor will be fine too, just don't leave amateurs
with notepad.
Siep
Nikolai Weibull
> Any other simple editor will be fine too, just don't leave amateurs
> with notepad.
Definitely leave it out. It’s RubyInstaller, not
RubyAndABunchOfOtherStuffInstaller. Keep it as simple and clean as
possible.
Luis Lavena
Nobody is leaving amateurs out, on the contrary we are embracing
diversity not imposing anything to anyone.
The reasoning behind the installer no longer bundles libraries or
externals from 3rd parties is because on every update of these, we are
requested to update the installer.
I remember several tickets in relation to SciTE, patches and syntax
coloring for it that forced updates of the installers just for that.
As the idea of RubyInstaller is focus on Ruby itself, meaning, get it
working and be able to deliver updates more often than before,
bringing new bundled tools to the installer will not help us with that
process.
I've shared a previous answer from me on this subject in the old list:
http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubyinstaller-devel/2009-August/000940.html
And if you search the group now, will find my updated answer:
See the responses to that thread, which if you look at the poll:
http://polldaddy.com/community/poll/2233856/
Will notice that only 10% reported other improvements after that
release, and that percentage was mainly SciTE.
However, the improvement to the Development Kit turned into a priority
and a highly requested feature.
--
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Jon
> with notepad.
How about providing a clean and informative mini Scite configuration HOWTO to this Wiki page?
http://wiki.github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller/windows-friendly-editors
While there's a ton of editors out there, each with their own partisans, perhaps showing *one* way of quickly setting up *one* of the editors leading to a more enjoyable Ruby coding does make sense.
That said, I don't think our wiki adds any value trying to be an Editor-Configuration-for-Ruby-on-Windows site.
Jon
* I promise I won't try to convince those of you non-gvim users why you've missed the boat ;)
Octagon
> > with notepad.
>
> How about providing a clean and informative mini Scite configuration HOWTO to this Wiki page?
>
I agree this is meaningless in the Ruby Installer docs. Evidently,
this should appear in the Scite docs.
If it does not, then the Scite usability for a newbie is
questionable.
> http://wiki.github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller/windows-friendly-editors
>
> While there's a ton of editors out there, each with their own partisans, perhaps showing *one* way of quickly setting up *one* of the editors leading to a more enjoyable Ruby coding does make sense.
>
> That said, I don't think our wiki adds any value trying to be an Editor-Configuration-for-Ruby-on-Windows site.
>
Exactly. However, it may or may not make sense to add some Edit-And-
Run-Configuration-On-Windows page. The task of setting a program to
run or edit a file with known extension is language and editor
agnostic and the Ruby Installer does that anyway, possibly not the
editor part right now. So, this is somewhat related to the installer.
This is more complex than it may seem since some users may prefer not
to allow any installer to change these settings and use the zipped
package. Most of them already know what to do, but the rest will find
the page helpful. It may be also helpful for those who used the
installer and want to change the settings later.
I would include this if Ruby Installer is positioning itself as a Ruby-
On-Windows place and not include if it is exactly Ruby-Installer.
Luis Lavena
I might be language impaired, so I'm going to try to respond what I
understand from your statements.
RubyInstaller is Ruby for Windows, that is role and main function.
RubyInstaller provides as helper and with the aim of making the life
of Ruby users in Windows a Development Kit, but not because of that,
imposes or bundles the kit with it.
The file associations and PATH modifications that the installer
provides are turned off by default. The reason for that is we don't
impose anything on anyone.
So if the user already have a working version of Ruby, why mess it up?
If we bundle an editor, excluding for a second the issues about
updates of it, we would be imposing something on others.
If the user doesn't have anything installed, it is fine. But what if
the user already have an editor or is comfortable with its current
file associations?
As example, I dislike when you install a program it turns by default
into your main video or audio player (looking at you VLC).
If we bundle SciTE, then others will came and say "Why you didn't
bundle Notepad+, or XYZ?"
One scenario is user already have NetBeans but don't want to use
bundled JRuby, so decide to install RubyInstaller...
So the thing is not that I don't want to take a decision on it, I
simply don't want to make that decision for others.
The whole concept around RubyInstaller is provide and stable, current
and usable Ruby platform for Windows. That is, was and will continue
to be my approach to RubyInstaller.
For example, that is one of the reasons why there is no "sqlite3.dll"
or other gems no longer bundled with the installer, they turn old the
second you release it.
I like to maintain things that I use, since I don't use SciTE, I
cannot support quality, features or even detect bugs on a daily basis.
That is not the case with Ruby, which I use daily.
Hope my point of view is clear on this. If someone wants to bundle
Rails, a fancy editor and other stuff, they can simple create an
installer on top of RubyInstaller.
But I don't want to be the dictator around the editor's choice for the user.
Thank you for your time reading this.
Nikolai Weibull
> Hope my point of view is clear on this. If someone wants to bundle
> Rails, a fancy editor and other stuff, they can simple create an
> installer on top of RubyInstaller.
Very eloquently put.
Jon
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/11/inside-minwin-the-windows-7-kernel-slims-down.ars
My perspective:
* Keep the RubyInstaller focused to where it adds value; installing a baseline Ruby environment on Windows
* Minimize dependencies
* Enable others to easily customize and reuse based upon their specific needs but don't turn personal preferences into The-One-True-Solution for others
* Provide helpful documentation where there's demand
This thread shows there's some demand for an example. While I think it makes more sense to be part of the official Scite/Scintilla docs, I have no problem with some added-value doco on our wiki.
If @steenslag would like to create clean, new-user-friendly Scite setup doco (please include screenshots) at
http://wiki.github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller/windows-friendly-editors
...I'll offer to help by setting up things so you can store the graphics (in one of our github repos) and embed the graphics similar to http://wiki.github.com/ffi/ffi/core-concepts (view the wiki source for the textile)
Jon
MarcRic
As you know Luis, I'm playing with Ruby Installer since 2007, and
totally agree with you.
On the other hand, I also agree with people asking to use SciTE as the
main Ruby editor.
I have been using SciTE all this years dealing with Ruby. It is my
primary Ruby editor.
So, here is my contribution with "amateurs" initiative:
http://www.public.marcric.com/installingruby.html
All the best.
MarcRic
As you know Luis, I'm playing with Ruby Installer since 2007, and
totally agree with you.
On the other hand, I also agree with people asking to use SciTE as the
main Ruby editor.
I have been using SciTE all this years dealing with Ruby. It is my
primary Ruby editor.
So, here is my contribution with "amateurs" initiative:
http://www.public.marcric.com/installingruby.html
All the best.
On Mar 12, 8:56 am, Luis Lavena <luislav...@gmail.com> wrote:
Luis Lavena
> Hi Luis and Folks,
>
> As you know Luis, I'm playing with Ruby Installer since 2007, and
> totally agree with you.
>
> On the other hand, I also agree with people asking to use SciTE as the
> main Ruby editor.
>
> I have been using SciTE all this years dealing with Ruby. It is my
> primary Ruby editor.
>
> So, here is my contribution with "amateurs" initiative:
>
> http://www.public.marcric.com/installingruby.html
>
> All the best.
>
Thank you Marcos Ricardo,
I've added a paragraph for SciTE in the wiki:
http://wiki.github.com/oneclick/rubyinstaller/windows-friendly-editors
Regards,
Juan Felipe Alvarez Saldarriaga
What about vim? it works lovely on windows, even gvim, if you want an
IDE try netbeans, netbeans has gem manager and works with the
RubyInstaller installation, you just need to add ruby.exe or just
click "Autodetect Platforms".
Luis Lavena
<neb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What about vim? it works lovely on windows, even gvim, if you want an
> IDE try netbeans, netbeans has gem manager and works with the
> RubyInstaller installation, you just need to add ruby.exe or just
> click "Autodetect Platforms".
>
The wiki are open to everybody, please feel free to add it.
If you have specific instructions to profit the maximum of it, better.