RubySpec Wiki in full swing

[Charles Oliver Nutter]

To help us alternative Ruby implementers keep our sanity, I've had a
wiki up for several weeks to see if it would work for gathering
documentation and information on the Ruby language, libraries, runtime,
and implementations. I hope for it to eventually cover everything from
quirks in the C and Java implementations to specifications for DRb and
marshaling (which is starting to come along, btw).

I know you all would be a huge help in filling it out. It's starting to
gather steam and gains new contributors every day. I think this is the
best way to build out a community-driven specification of what Ruby
really is...a continuously evolving specification that can be a
day-to-day reference for both new and experienced Ruby programmers.

The wiki is hosted on my site for now:

http://www.headius.com/rubyspec

Won't you folks (experts and nubys alike) contribute a bit on your
favorite language feature, library, or implementation quirk? You'll be
my hero if you do!

 

[Bil Kleb]

Hi.

The wiki is hosted on my site for now:

http://www.headius.com/rubyspec

Won't you folks (experts and nubys alike) contribute a bit on your
favorite language feature, library, or implementation quirk? You'll be
my hero if you do!

What happened to good ol' Rubicon,

http://www.rubycentral.com/downloads/rubicon.html

the creature that allowed Pickaxe?

I noticed a bunch of dots last time I did a 'make test'...

Regards,

 

[Brian Mitchell]

Hi.


What happened to good ol' Rubicon,

http://www.rubycentral.com/downloads/rubicon.html

the creature that allowed Pickaxe?

I noticed a bunch of dots last time I did a 'make test'...

That has been forked off into oblivion it seems. Ryan Davis started
the BFTS project not long after RubyConf05 but it is only available in
a perforce repository last I heard. I am still interested in working
on stuff like this but I personally think that the project should be
much more open and available [1].

A wiki like RubySpec is just what we need to get started IMHO. Maybe
we could even make use of _why's awesome sandboxed wiki technology to
provide inline test content along side whatever words and examples we
start putting together.

In the future, we could write some sort of extraction mechanism to
pull both docs and tests into projects that might want to take
advantage of such. The reverse might be possible as well if
BFTS/Rubicon and the wiki share enough conventions.

Brian.

[1] No offense meant to the efforts that have been made. It just isn't
a very visible project and that hurts awareness and possible
contribution.

 

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

That has been forked off into oblivion it seems. Ryan Davis started
the BFTS project not long after RubyConf05 but it is only available in
a perforce repository last I heard. I am still interested in working
on stuff like this but I personally think that the project should be
much more open and available [1].

[1] No offense meant to the efforts that have been made. It just isn't
a very visible project and that hurts awareness and possible
contribution.

Well ... you're not the only one who wants to get their hands on BFTS.
Maybe that's part of the problem -- rather than a "BF" test suite,
there should be a "BF" collection of little test suites, contributed by
users with various areas of expertise, such as numerical and scientific
computing, web applications, Windows development, distributed computing
-- all areas where Ruby is expanding into from its "base" as an
object-oriented scripting language.

I'd certainly be willing to contribute numerical computing tests -- I've
got to build them anyhow.