Very cool, I might give it a few days to see if someone writes an article so I'm not totally on the bleeding edge, but otherwise I'll give it a look myself. Thanks Laurant, I've been working with your code since my Brainjuice days with Blogo glad to see ruby + osx continuing.
In my experience, the text-editor/command-line path is the only way to be truly "pixel perfect". Visual tools can get you most of the way there, but it seems you always inevitably have to touch the drawing code if you want true accuracy.
Oh, and as for Objective-C being a fast growing language? The rise of Objective-C is directly tied to the rise of the iOS platform. If iOS had been written in any other language, Objective-C would still be a mostly forgotten language today.
You can still use XCode's interface builder and use Storyboards and XIBs with RubyMotion. It's not as nicely coupled as it is with Objective-C, but again, RubyMotion is in its infancy and evolving rapidly.
Well, MacRuby is a language on top of Objective-C. You can use Cocoa with it, but you should be able to use the Chameleon framework too, assuming it is GC-friendly (otherwise, adding GC support shouldn't be hard). His points don't make much sense to me.
MacRuby was version 0.1 about 3 years ago. A lot happened since, and we expect the next release to be our 1.0 RC. For Cocoa development, it's very stable, we haven't received any critical bug report since at least 3 releases.
Ah. I read 0.10 and thought 0.1. It's a logical mistake to make since 0.1 is a number and is the same as 0.10, I know a lot of other people count releases the same way, but skipping 0.10 might be a bit helpful, or keeping to a strict 0-9 policy. I saw Linus got tired of the 2.6.39 counting and just skipped ahead to 3.0.
Hmm, is that really a problem? https://github.com/macruby/macruby is working as expected. I assume you would just type the camel case name once, when cloning the repository.
The default deployment settings will indeed generate a pretty big application, but it is possible to trim out unnecessary stuff (such as the standard library or extensions). Also, we are hopefully dropping i386 support in 0.10, therefore the MacRuby binaries will be 2 times smaller.
From one presumably in the know, that would lend (to a suspicious individual like myself) credence to the theory that.. a future version of the OS will definitely be 64-bit by default.
2 times smaller? I wish I had the math chops to compute/debate that, but it seems like an even more substantial gain than dropping PPC code in SnowLeo did(plus binary/compression optimizations).
A bright future, thanks for all your dedication and hard work!
