[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

FXRuby for fox-toolkit-1.4.11?

Jim Freeze

4/6/2005 8:13:00 PM

Hi

What FXRuby version should I use with fox-toolkit-1.4.11?

Thanks
--
Jim Freeze
Code Red. Code Ruby


9 Answers

Lyle Johnson

4/6/2005 9:18:00 PM

0

On Apr 6, 2005 3:12 PM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:

> What FXRuby version should I use with fox-toolkit-1.4.11?

You will need to jump into your time machine and travel into the
future where such a version of FXRuby actually exists. I do not yet
have an estimate of how far into the future you will need to travel.


Richard Lyman

4/6/2005 9:23:00 PM

0

On Apr 6, 2005 2:12 PM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:
> Hi
>
> What FXRuby version should I use with fox-toolkit-1.4.11?
>
> Thanks
> --
> Jim Freeze
> Code Red. Code Ruby
>
>

Short answer - none.

From the front page of the website...

Versions

As of the FOX 1.0 release, any FXRuby version 1.0.x release should
be compatible with any FOX 1.0.x release. Similarly, any FXRuby
version 1.2.x release should be compatible with any FOX 1.2.x release.

... Lyle is working on the FXRuby version that would work with the
latest FOX release.

Is there something in the 1.4.11 FOX release that you need that isn't
in 1.2? I know there's things that I'm waiting anxiously for...

-Rich


Sander Jansen

4/7/2005 3:28:00 AM

0

Does your glass ball tell you how many lunches you need have in order to
finish it?

Sander

On Wednesday 06 April 2005 14:17, Lyle Johnson wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2005 3:12 PM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:
> > What FXRuby version should I use with fox-toolkit-1.4.11?
>
> You will need to jump into your time machine and travel into the
> future where such a version of FXRuby actually exists. I do not yet
> have an estimate of how far into the future you will need to travel.


Jim Freeze

4/7/2005 11:23:00 AM

0

* Lyle Johnson <lyle.johnson@gmail.com> [2005-04-07 06:17:42 +0900]:

> On Apr 6, 2005 3:12 PM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:
>
> > What FXRuby version should I use with fox-toolkit-1.4.11?
>
> You will need to jump into your time machine and travel into the
> future where such a version of FXRuby actually exists.

Hey, I hear you can buy one of those things on the internet.

--
Jim Freeze
Code Red. Code Ruby


Lyle Johnson

4/7/2005 12:58:00 PM

0

On Apr 7, 2005 6:22 AM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:

> Hey, I hear you can buy one of those things on the internet.

Yeah, time travel is easy. I've already looked into it for myself. ;)


Lyle Johnson

4/7/2005 1:09:00 PM

0

On Apr 6, 2005 10:27 PM, Sander Jansen <sander@knology.net> wrote:

> Does your glass ball tell you how many lunches you need have in order to
> finish it?

I told you guys it's gonna take more than lunch from Schlotzsky's to
bribe me to get this finished. We're talking a steak dinner, at least.
;)

But seriously, though: On my first pass through, I'm trying to merge
in the changes to the public APIs. This basically includes old
functions whose signatures have changed, new functions, removed
functions, and new classes. When I compared the FOX 1.2 header files
to the FOX 1.4 header files, about 150 of the 200+ header files had
changed in some way, and so that gives you some idea of how much
changed in the public APIs alone. I would say I'm about a third of the
way through those changes.

The next step, which is more tedious, is trying to figure out the
subtle changes in the implementation. For example, suppose some
function for the FXTable class used to delete the table items it was
processing, but now it doesn't. I have to know things like that for
the the garbage collection of Ruby objects to be handled properly. Or
maybe some widget used to send an integer as its message data and now
it sends a double-precision float. Seemingly little changes like that
can be very difficult to identify, and it just takes a lot of code
inspection.

All that is to say that I have no idea how to estimate the time it
will take to eat this elephant, I just have to do it one bite at a
time.


Jamey Cribbs

4/7/2005 1:19:00 PM

0

Lyle Johnson wrote:

>All that is to say that I have no idea how to estimate the time it
>will take to eat this elephant, I just have to do it one bite at a
>time.
>
>
Lyle, I happen to remember a few months back you shirking your FXRuby
responsibilities and actually taking your wife out for your
anniversary. It's selfishness like that that is delaying FXRuby 1.4! :-)

Jamey

Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email and any materials contained in any attachments is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are not the intended recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender by email and destroy all copies of the original message, including attachments.


Richard Lyman

4/7/2005 3:55:00 PM

0

On Apr 7, 2005 7:19 AM, Jamey Cribbs <cribbsj@oakwood.org> wrote:
> Lyle Johnson wrote:
>
> >All that is to say that I have no idea how to estimate the time it
> >will take to eat this elephant, I just have to do it one bite at a
> >time.
> >
> >
> Lyle, I happen to remember a few months back you shirking your FXRuby
> responsibilities and actually taking your wife out for your
> anniversary. It's selfishness like that that is delaying FXRuby 1.4! :-)
>
> Jamey

In that case - I salute your selfishness!!

-Rich


Sander Jansen

4/8/2005 12:04:00 AM

0

Yup as a matter of fact, just the other weekend I traveled one hour into the
future... No FXRuby 1.4 yet though...

For more information see:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1468&item=5570508215&rd=1&ssPag...


Sander


On Thursday 07 April 2005 05:57, Lyle Johnson wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2005 6:22 AM, Jim Freeze <jim@freeze.org> wrote:
> > Hey, I hear you can buy one of those things on the internet.
>
> Yeah, time travel is easy. I've already looked into it for myself. ;)