RE: [Rubydotnet-developer] [ANN] Ruby/.NET bridge release 4 now available

[Thomas S. <th...@th...>]

> I wonder if we should seriously consider joining efforts more
> closely before seriously considering offering a helping hand=20
> to other language enthusiasts? The trouble is, we both have a=20
> lot invested in what we've done and merging is never an easy=20
> task. Maybe it doesn't matter, but I just wonder.

I think it is worth considering too. So lets talk about it and see what =
we
can agree on.

When I started I was aware of your project and I have attempted to =
factor my
code so it is relatively easy to separate parts and merge into other
projects. The parts that are mostly independent of my rubydotnet =
extension
are

1) The type resolution system and the interface 'implements' statement =
is
independent of .net and my rubydotnet module and would work with your
extension or the java equivalent, for that matter. I know that you like =
the
namespace "flattening" that your extension provides, but I prefer having
full control and more importantly I like the fact that accessing the =
.net
classes from ruby is completely equivalent to the way ordinary ruby =
classes
are accessed.

2) ScriptingExtensions for .net depends on two narrow/small interfaces
IObject and IProc. There is significant overlap with your code when it
concerns typed delegate creation and .net interface implementation, but =
it
is not much code and we should adopt interface and implementation to the
more robust and flexible of the two, if we were to merge. I would very =
much
like to keep all the non-ruby specific stuff in a separate project. I =
have
joined the modules using the CVS facility for doing so, I'm sure =
Perforce
has the same ability. I am very certain that the Lua and TCL camps and
others will soon desire .net interop and we may as well share =
functionality
that is common across all scripting languages.

So my position is that I would want to keep these two aspects of my =
project.
Next on my work agenda are

* Embedding interface, so you can embed the ruby interpreter in a .net
application. Do you all ready have an interface for embedding the
interpreter without the use of sockets?
* Mono support
* Take a look at ruby threading on Windows
* Ruby support in Visual Studio .net - primarily indentation and syntax
highlighting.

The last two bullit points are not really within the scope of =
rubydotnet.

Thomas