[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: ruby-talk
Subject: Re: [ANN] Non-standard library project
From: Tyler Zesiger <mailing-lists () zesiger ! com>
Date: 2004-06-14 16:00:24
Message-ID: 40CDCB44.1000103 () zesiger ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Might this have a place in the "batteries included" ideas that have been
floating around for a future ruby release? It sounds like a good start
to me.
Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It's a bit cheeky to call this an announcement, since it's only
> announcing a project idea.
>
> I would like to create a RubyForge project that builds a library of
> useful classes and modules. That basically describes the standard
> library. This library wouldn't be standard, hence the name
> "non-standard library".
>
> The purposes of the project:
>
> * collect existing small projects (e.g. Memoize) to ensure their
> continued maintenance, and hopefully give them higher exposure
>
> * provide a good environment for the development of ADTs, etc.
> that might otherwise not seem worthwhile due to project
> management overhead
>
> * provide a rich library that is easy to install and has a high
> standard of documentation and testing
>
> * thus, convenience and quality
>
> For example, a very recent thread suggested *replacing* pack and
> unpack with an OO version (Packer and Unpacker classes). That's a
> radical suggestion that's unlikely to be accepted. The milder
> approach of providing an OO facade to the existing methods is more
> reasonable, but if accepted, would still take a long time to appear in
> a Ruby release.
>
> On the other hand, inclusion of this idea in a 'nonstdlib' project
> would be feasible and fast. Before long, you could write in your
> code something like this:
>
> require_gem 'nonstdlib', '>= 0.3'
> require 'nonstdlib/packer'
>
> p = Packer.new
> p.word 0x01
> p.word 0x00
> # etc.
>
> Notice that the version number can be specified to ensure that the
> 'nonstdlib' gem has the required feature. Of course, you can use
> the 'require' line without the 'require_gem' line: RubyGems is not an
> actual dependency here.
>
> The steps to getting this started are:
>
> 1. Get feedback from interested people.
>
> 2. Decide on a name.
>
> 3. Start a RubyForge project and mailing list.
>
> 4. Take it from there.
>
> If there's no interest to start with, I'll just get going. But this
> sort of thing would benefit from involvement by interested people.
>
> The main thing for now is the name. That enables the creation of the
> mailing list, on which people can express interest.
>
> I think 'nonstdlib' is a good name. Anyone got other ideas?
>
> Cheers,
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic