Hey tony!

Feb 21 16:21 05, tony summerfelt wrote to Maurice Kinal:

 ts> not just for me, but for clients...wrap up the script, deliver...make 
 ts> money :)

Ah!  Well then I'd have to be in full agreement with you about their
"usefulness".  :-)

 ts> my logging program works fine under dos with the threads. of course 
 ts> with dos not being multitasking  any long running ruby program would 
 ts> need to be run under desqview/etc.

Okay, so then DOS requires more then just Ruby to be effective.

 MK>> "useful" then Perl when talking portability but then
again that would
 MK>> mean that the Windows boxes would require a Ruby interpretor,

 ts> not nessarily. there are at least three ways to wrap ruby code so 
 ts> only one executable  need be distributed.  although there's a 'one 
 ts> click installer' for ruby on windows that's easily installed...

I saw something about that (installer) at the site but no mention, or at
least none that I saw, about Ruby not being present on a targetted machine.
 Are you saying that the source on the development machine is compilable
such that the target doesn't require an interpretor?  That would be handy
if true.  But then does the development machine require a cross-platform
compiler?

 ts> for the most part i just wrap the ruby code and deliver...

Nice work if you can get it.  ;-)

Life is good,
Maurice

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2