I started writing my first Shoes application (red shoes, I believe, http://shoesrb.com/) a couple of months ago on Windows 7. I really like how easy it is to use. I've written a small app that I use as a front-end to my Java SW development tasks, such as running maven, subversion, etc. It consists of 14 .rb files with about 2500 total lines of ruby. It's great, however, it crashes pretty often with a dialog box saying that the program stopped in an unexpected way, and if I'm running it from eclipse, I can see that the crashes stem from a segmentation fault. The problem of course could be entirely due to a bug within my code, but I wanted to ask if this is a known issue with Shoes. Are Shoes apps in general known to crash a lot? Thanks, Alan.
Hey Alan- tl;dr: Yes, on Windows, we're seeing a lot of segfaults. This is currently what I'm pouring my life into trying to fix. Slightly longer and nerdier explanation: Shoes is written in a lot of C code. This C code works with ruby's internal stuff, since Ruby is also written in C, and exposes Ruby to you. Shoes was originally written by a guy named _why, and for Ruby 1.8. We're now running the project, and since then, Ruby 1.9 is standard. In ruby 1.9.1, apparently there are issues with threading. With Ruby 1.9.2, they totally re-did the threading model, and it's much better. So we're currently in the process of moving Shoes to Ruby 1.9.2. I've been talking with the new guy on the core Ruby team for windows about it, and we're working on some solutions. Right now though, you'll see some instability. This is my #1 priority going forward, though. -Steve
Steve, Thanks for the explanation, and I'm glad to hear that Shoes is actively being improved. In my experience, Shoes is the easiest toolkit I've ever used for building GUI applications quickly, so keep up the good work! Alan. On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote: > Hey Alan- > > tl;dr: Yes, on Windows, we're seeing a lot of segfaults. This is currently > what I'm pouring my life into trying to fix. > > Slightly longer and nerdier explanation: > > Shoes is written in a lot of C code. This C code works with ruby's internal > stuff, since Ruby is also written in C, and exposes Ruby to you. Shoes was > originally written by a guy named _why, and for Ruby 1.8. We're now running > the project, and since then, Ruby 1.9 is standard. > > In ruby 1.9.1, apparently there are issues with threading. With Ruby 1.9.2, > they totally re-did the threading model, and it's much better. So we're > currently in the process of moving Shoes to Ruby 1.9.2. > > I've been talking with the new guy on the core Ruby team for windows about > it, and we're working on some solutions. Right now though, you'll see some > instability. This is my #1 priority going forward, though. > > -Steve >
Hi Steve, Any target estimate for Shoes 4 release? Thanks, Alan. On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Alan Jelden <alan.jelden@gmail.com> wrote: > Steve, > > Thanks for the explanation, and I'm glad to hear that Shoes is actively > being improved. In my experience, Shoes is the easiest toolkit I've ever > used for building GUI applications quickly, so keep up the good work! > > Alan. > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote: > >> Hey Alan- >> >> tl;dr: Yes, on Windows, we're seeing a lot of segfaults. This is currently >> what I'm pouring my life into trying to fix. >> >> Slightly longer and nerdier explanation: >> >> Shoes is written in a lot of C code. This C code works with ruby's >> internal stuff, since Ruby is also written in C, and exposes Ruby to you. >> Shoes was originally written by a guy named _why, and for Ruby 1.8. We're >> now running the project, and since then, Ruby 1.9 is standard. >> >> In ruby 1.9.1, apparently there are issues with threading. With Ruby >> 1.9.2, they totally re-did the threading model, and it's much better. So >> we're currently in the process of moving Shoes to Ruby 1.9.2. >> >> I've been talking with the new guy on the core Ruby team for windows about >> it, and we're working on some solutions. Right now though, you'll see some >> instability. This is my #1 priority going forward, though. >> >> -Steve >> > >
I'm not confident picking a date yet. I'm just starting to dig into exactly what we'll need to take care of. With that said, we have a bunch of new activity in the last week, and so I'm pretty optimistic we'll get a release out in a month or two. But no promises until we're closer.
Ok. Thanks. On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote: > I'm not confident picking a date yet. I'm just starting to dig into exactly > what we'll need to take care of. > > With that said, we have a bunch of new activity in the last week, and so > I'm pretty optimistic we'll get a release out in a month or two. But no > promises until we're closer. >