DrShoggoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DrShoggoth has joined #opal
DrShoggoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DrShoggoth has joined #opal
elia has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.]
DouweM has joined #opal
DrShoggoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DrShoggoth has joined #opal
DrShoggoth has quit [Read error: No route to host]
DrShoggoth has joined #opal
denysonique has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
davidboy has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
lectrick has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
adrocknaphobia has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DrShoggoth has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DrShoggoth has joined #opal
ylluminate has joined #opal
adambeynon has joined #opal
Guest76482 has joined #opal
Guest76482 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Guest76482 has joined #opal
davidboy has joined #opal
lectrick has joined #opal
<fkchang>
adambeynon: any progress on code/comments? [09:21]
<fkchang>
<adambeynon>
hi fkchang, nothing huge yet
<adambeynon>
I have found a couple of lexing bugs which I need to fix
<adambeynon>
as they report incorrect line numbers
[spoiler] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
DrShoggoth has quit [Quit: Leaving]
elia has joined #opal
<ylluminate>
hey adambeynon, where are things going with opal? i guess i'm not crystal clear on the goal here. i had figured it's goal is a drop in replacement for ruby essentially, but when i went to fire off an opal irb, i didn't really find anything; i was hoping to not only exec things from the shell, but also be able to do so interactively.
<meh`>
ylluminate, what do you mean you didn't find anything?
<ylluminate>
well, is there an irb?
<ylluminate>
when i tried this a month or so ago, it even seemed to fail at running rb files in the shell
<meh`>
ylluminate, opal is mainly targeted at the browser
<meh`>
ylluminate, there's not much focus for it to run in a shell
<ylluminate>
well, i was hoping to use it in the shell so that i could use it more freely
<ylluminate>
running it from the browser is such a burden for running all of the rb scripts and programs i have
<fkchang>
ylluminate: you can install opal via rvm which runs over node
<fkchang>
elia: wrote that and knows about that
<ylluminate>
so that actually works atm?
<meh`>
ylluminate, what's the point of running opal like that?
<ylluminate>
i'm a shell guy, fits my workflow much more
<meh`>
if you want to run Ruby scripts, use Ruby
<ylluminate>
seems silly to run it from a browser personally
<meh`>
Opal is for the browser, and to a lesser extent for other js environments
<elia>
ylluminate, yes, it works, or at least was working last time I tried it
<ylluminate>
well, it seems very attractive to have opal on the shell; potentially faster than standard ruby
<ylluminate>
great, thanks elia
<elia>
ylluminate, faster is another story btw :)
<meh`>
ylluminate, that's not the point of Opal, and I sincerely doubt it can be any faster than MRI, JRuby or Rubinius
<elia>
well, uless we talk about startup time :) jruby is quite easy to beat at that
<ylluminate>
so what is the goal of opal, just making ruby run in the browser as a client side language?
<meh`>
yes
<ylluminate>
i thought it was odd to see some ppl putting servers together on opal then
<meh`>
it is
<meh`>
it can be an interesting test, but anyone using that in production has to be crazy
<elia>
ylluminate, beware anyhow that it's not a complete ruby :)
<elia>
meh`, ppl uses all kinds of crazy stuff in prod :)
<elia>
…including node
<meh`>
well of course, they're clearly crazy
<elia>
lolz
<ylluminate>
well one interesting application that i saw immediately valuable would be to cross translate rb -> js and vice versa; has that been tried?
<elia>
ylluminate, lemme know if u incur in any issues…
<meh`>
ylluminate, no, you can't decompile Opal reliably
<elia>
not worth it
<ylluminate>
so what kind of an effort would it take to get something like http://js2coffee.org together?
<elia>
ylluminate, i already moved stuff from front to back and vicev.
<elia>
a couple times
<meh`>
ylluminate, a useless effort
<elia>
:)
<meh`>
opal has nothing to share with coffeescript other than targeting javascript
<ylluminate>
well i don't consider it useless at all
<ylluminate>
i'd like to see how such an effort would be undertaken
<ylluminate>
that would be a very attractive little project and would certainly yank down a LOT of attention
<meh`>
I don't see how
<ylluminate>
probably a hugely useful marketing tool as well
<elia>
ylluminate, my cs code usually resembles ruby, but it's easier to tralate manualy I think
<ylluminate>
believe me, it would get a lot of attention
<elia>
ylluminate, on that I agree
<meh`>
ylluminate, I still don't see the point, what is it?
<elia>
buzz
<adambeynon>
ylluminate: we can't convert javascript back to ruby easily. we compile to a very small subset of javascript, so most javascript code could not be converted back to ruby code
<ylluminate>
bingo elia
<meh`>
pointless
<meh`>
there are more important things to do
<ylluminate>
not pointless at all if you want this to really take hold
<meh`>
I want it to work
<ylluminate>
90% of any success is marketing
<ylluminate>
regardless of whether you want it to work; a la ms, apple, etc.
<ylluminate>
the more it is seen, the more contributors and buzz and fundability
<elia>
ylluminate, i think submittin posts to rub5/rweekly/rflow about before after from cs to ruby/opal would be better (buzz+useful stuff)
<meh`>
adambeynon, can you check the regex error I reported please?
<ylluminate>
well, but then when they get there elia, what will they see? having that little tool really gives a great wow factor;
<ylluminate>
i was thinking js <-> ruby <-> cs
<elia>
ylluminate, problem i see is that i don't think it could be done…
<ylluminate>
well, that's the question. it certainly can be done, but the problem is how much effort would it take and what is the roi
<meh`>
ylluminate, where does your certainity come from?
<meh`>
there's no way to reliably convert the compiled Ruby code into JavaScript back to Ruby
<elia>
ylluminate, but maybe it's worth trying… recycling code from js2cs if u want
<elia>
my take is low roi
<ylluminate>
the roi is quite high, but presently the way it is structured and the way the main developers are thinking about it don't fit into this model.
<elia>
i i still think that a continuous campaign on those media is more effective
<ylluminate>
i have a background in computer science meh`, i know it can be done, but i haven't dug into the project as it now stands so i can't speak authoritatively based on the current paradigm
<ylluminate>
they're all parts of the same puzzle elia, but you've got to have multiple insertion points once ppl come in that yield some fast "wows"
<meh`>
ylluminate, you can have a background in being an all knowing energy based entity, but that doesn't change the fact it cannot be done reliably
<ylluminate>
"go is 50x faster than rails" for example is enough to get people seriously looking at it
<elia>
ylluminate, also making opalrb.org more attractive would do, this and posts are low hanging fruits
<elia>
ylluminate, starting an opal blog/articles is another
<ylluminate>
sorry multitasking here and caught up in a meeting, but yeah, those are all good. but yes elia, i need to look at js2cofffee and see how they've done this.
<fkchang>
ylluminate: I appreciate you have ideas and excitement. I think js2coffee is much easier because there is a direct mapping from CS to JS, that gets harder w/ruby where there is much more that opal can do that you can't do in JS or CS
<ylluminate>
so you're saying fkchang that opal is not a direct ruby to js mapping
<fkchang>
my thought was the selling point of Opal was that you can code Ruby in the browser, so that unmanagemanageable mess of JS code is now beautiful ruby. That won't speak to non rubyists much until we can give good examples of something that is much more beautiful maintainable in opal vs the JS or CS version
<fkchang>
ylluminate: I'm saying that Opal is ruby that runs in the browser
<fkchang>
mostly
<fkchang>
3300ish rubyspecs passing
<ylluminate>
out of?
<fkchang>
I dunno, rubyspec is not easy to get the percentage of
<fkchang>
adambeynon: was going to try to figure that out for me
<fkchang>
u do compile opal down to JS, but there's some stuff down there that allows for things like method_missing, arity_checks, operator overloading, etc..
<fkchang>
My own contribution is to make some nifty in browser tools that I plan to be better than what's there for the backend.
<ylluminate>
so that can all be shown as raw js output; realizing that it will be a little messy, it could show support methods in a sub window so that core / direct translation is topmost and the supporting cruft is visible.
<fkchang>
u can use tryopal to see what the compiled code looks like, along w/running it
<elia>
fkchang, adambeynon, ylluminate, I think rubyspec clocks around 19k examples