2009/1/7 Anthony Buck <[email protected]>
> Koen,
>
> Should be trivial to use all/any ruby gems (of which active record is one)
> from the wt::ruby implementation. (playing with active record as we speak)
>
> Roja
>
> 2009/1/7 Richard Dale <[email protected]>
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Koen Deforche <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Richard,
>>>
>>> 2009/1/7 Richard Dale <[email protected]>:
>>> > I added those lines to the config files, built and installed Wt and
>>> Wt::Ruby
>>> > into /usr instead of /usr/local and now it all works, both C++ and Ruby
>>> with
>>> > FastCGC! I renamed the hello.rb example hello_ruby.wt and added a line
>>> for
>>> > it in the fastcgi.conf file. At the top I put '#!/usr/bin/ruby' and
>>> made it
>>> > executable, and changed require 'wt' to require 'wtfcgi'.
>>> >
>>> > So that means that as far as Apache2 and FastCGI are concerned a
>>> Wt::Ruby
>>> > application in a '*.wt' file is identical to a Wt C++ one. It should be
>>> > possible to configure Apache to use '*.rb' files, but maybe it is a
>>> good
>>> > idea to give the top level a different extension to normal ruby scripts
>>> (or
>>> > '*.wtrb' or '*.wtruby' perhaps).
>>> >
>>> > Getting fastcgi working with Wt::Ruby is really the last major
>>> milestone
>>> > before a first release - I just need to do a few more docs to explain
>>> it all
>>> > now.
>>>
>>> Congratulations!
>>>
>>> I would not worry that much about the extensions: while convenient to
>>> configure apache2 and FastCGI to automatically handle particular URLs,
>>> in a production environment you should probably manually map the
>>> application to a URL that does not expose the technology (for URL
>>> stability).
>>>
>>> We had a look at the ruby examples: although we have no ruby
>>> experience whatsoever, I was pleasantly surprised by the clarity.
>>>
>>> The promising state of Wt::Ruby also a new question: is it
>>> trivial/possible/hard or virtually impossible to integrate this with
>>> the active record layer of Ruby on Rails or a similar database layer ?
>>
>> Yes, it works fine - see the hangman example.
>>
>> For QtRuby I've included a couple of models based on ActiveRecord, a
>> Qt::AbstractItemModel for use with Qt::TreeViews and a
>> Qt::AbstractTableModel on for use with Qt::TableView. So it should be
>> possible to do much the same for the Wt equivalent models.
>>
>> There may be other things that we can borrow from Rails too. For instance,
>> ActiveResource is a way of returning xml derived from a database table, from
>> the web server that work like ActiveRecord models on the client side. Or
>> there are quite a few convenience classes (eg extending the Ruby time and
>> date classes) in ActiveSupport that would work well with Wt::Ruby.
>>
>> -- Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
>> It is the best place to buy or sell services for
>> just about anything Open Source.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB
>> _______________________________________________
>> witty-interest mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It is the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
