Hey guys, I''m wondering about future of AS and Extlib. I heard that these two should be merged (so extlib will actually die), which makes sense since these two are sort of similar so we can have just one main library with Ruby stdlib extensions. However would this library be suitable for smaller frameworks like Ramaze or Rango? In current Rails 3 activesupport/lib has 2.8 MB and 52 415 lines (via wc -l) which is more than 20x times bigger than the whole Rango, so it''s not an option for me (as I''m the author of Rango). I was talking to Pavel Kunc who currently maintain Merb and it seems he would like also something significantly smaller. So what we are suggesting is to keep extlib for these really basic things like cattr_*, String#to_snakecase etc and everything else put into activesupport which will be builded on top of extlib. So everyone should be happy: 1) There would be just one extensions library (well, one small and one big, but the point is it''s still DRY) 2) Rails will have AS, so Rails will be happy and smaller frameworks will have extlib, so they could be happy as well. In case you guys won''t like this idea, there would be need for smaller extension library, so someone (probably me) will write it and code duplication, welcome back. So what do you think? Cheers, Jakub -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Heya, We spent a bunch of time making ActiveSupport more cherry-pickable. If there are still clumps that aren''t fine-grained enough for your needs (I did some work to make the inflector a bit more fine-grained), please let me know (I''d consider it a bug). Are you otherwise concerned about the disk space occupied by ActiveSupport? Please explain a bit more exactly what your requirements are that prevent the use of ActiveSupport in Rails 3. Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:26 AM, botanicus <stastny@101ideas.cz> wrote:> Hey guys, > > I''m wondering about future of AS and Extlib. I heard that these two > should be merged (so extlib will actually die), which makes sense > since these two are sort of similar so we can have just one main > library with Ruby stdlib extensions. > > However would this library be suitable for smaller frameworks like > Ramaze or Rango? In current Rails 3 activesupport/lib has 2.8 MB and > 52 415 lines (via wc -l) which is more than 20x times bigger than the > whole Rango, so it''s not an option for me (as I''m the author of > Rango). > > I was talking to Pavel Kunc who currently maintain Merb and it seems > he would like also something significantly smaller. > > So what we are suggesting is to keep extlib for these really basic > things like cattr_*, String#to_snakecase etc and everything else put > into activesupport which will be builded on top of extlib. > > So everyone should be happy: > 1) There would be just one extensions library (well, one small and > one big, but the point is it''s still DRY) > 2) Rails will have AS, so Rails will be happy and smaller frameworks > will have extlib, so they could be happy as well. > > In case you guys won''t like this idea, there would be need for smaller > extension library, so someone (probably me) will write it and code > duplication, welcome back. > > So what do you think? > > Cheers, > > Jakub > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:26 AM, botanicus <stastny@101ideas.cz> wrote:> Hey guys, > > I''m wondering about future of AS and Extlib. I heard that these two > should be merged (so extlib will actually die), which makes sense > since these two are sort of similar so we can have just one main > library with Ruby stdlib extensions. > > However would this library be suitable for smaller frameworks like > Ramaze or Rango? In current Rails 3 activesupport/lib has 2.8 MB and > 52 415 lines (via wc -l) which is more than 20x times bigger than the > whole Rango, so it''s not an option for me (as I''m the author of > Rango). > > I was talking to Pavel Kunc who currently maintain Merb and it seems > he would like also something significantly smaller. > > So what we are suggesting is to keep extlib for these really basic > things like cattr_*, String#to_snakecase etc and everything else put > into activesupport which will be builded on top of extlib. > > So everyone should be happy: > 1) There would be just one extensions library (well, one small and > one big, but the point is it''s still DRY) > 2) Rails will have AS, so Rails will be happy and smaller frameworks > will have extlib, so they could be happy as well. > > In case you guys won''t like this idea, there would be need for smaller > extension library, so someone (probably me) will write it and code > duplication, welcome back. > > So what do you think?Active Support''s baseline resource consumption is nearly zero. It now boots faster, creates fewer objects, and allocates less memory than extlib. Why is wc -l your measure? Best, jeremy -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Hi Yehuda, I''m not sure if you get me right, AS is fine for Rails 3, but we are more interested in something more suitable for smaller frameworks, so we would very welcome to have extlib with basic things and as with the rest. On Dec 14, 9:26 pm, Yehuda Katz <wyc...@gmail.com> wrote:> Heya, > > We spent a bunch of time making ActiveSupport more cherry-pickable. If there > are still clumps that aren''t fine-grained enough for your needs (I did some > work to make the inflector a bit more fine-grained), please let me know (I''d > consider it a bug). > > Are you otherwise concerned about the disk space occupied by ActiveSupport? > Please explain a bit more exactly what your requirements are that prevent > the use of ActiveSupport in Rails 3. > > Yehuda Katz > Developer | Engine Yard > (ph) 718.877.1325 > > > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:26 AM, botanicus <stas...@101ideas.cz> wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > I''m wondering about future of AS and Extlib. I heard that these two > > should be merged (so extlib will actually die), which makes sense > > since these two are sort of similar so we can have just one main > > library with Ruby stdlib extensions. > > > However would this library be suitable for smaller frameworks like > > Ramaze or Rango? In current Rails 3 activesupport/lib has 2.8 MB and > > 52 415 lines (via wc -l) which is more than 20x times bigger than the > > whole Rango, so it''s not an option for me (as I''m the author of > > Rango). > > > I was talking to Pavel Kunc who currently maintain Merb and it seems > > he would like also something significantly smaller. > > > So what we are suggesting is to keep extlib for these really basic > > things like cattr_*, String#to_snakecase etc and everything else put > > into activesupport which will be builded on top of extlib. > > > So everyone should be happy: > > 1) There would be just one extensions library (well, one small and > > one big, but the point is it''s still DRY) > > 2) Rails will have AS, so Rails will be happy and smaller frameworks > > will have extlib, so they could be happy as well. > > > In case you guys won''t like this idea, there would be need for smaller > > extension library, so someone (probably me) will write it and code > > duplication, welcome back. > > > So what do you think? > > > Cheers, > > > Jakub > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscrib e@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Because I don''t want to spent ages when I''m reading source code just scrolling down in dir browser buffer and I don''t care about 95% stuff included in AS. Because I want less things in my git repository, faster deploys etc etc. AS is just not what I''m going to use when I actually need just a few tiny methods to standard Ruby, that''s it. Cheers, Jakub On Dec 14, 10:06 pm, Jeremy Kemper <jer...@bitsweat.net> wrote:> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:26 AM, botanicus <stas...@101ideas.cz> wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > I''m wondering about future of AS and Extlib. I heard that these two > > should be merged (so extlib will actually die), which makes sense > > since these two are sort of similar so we can have just one main > > library with Ruby stdlib extensions. > > > However would this library be suitable for smaller frameworks like > > Ramaze or Rango? In current Rails 3 activesupport/lib has 2.8 MB and > > 52 415 lines (via wc -l) which is more than 20x times bigger than the > > whole Rango, so it''s not an option for me (as I''m the author of > > Rango). > > > I was talking to Pavel Kunc who currently maintain Merb and it seems > > he would like also something significantly smaller. > > > So what we are suggesting is to keep extlib for these really basic > > things like cattr_*, String#to_snakecase etc and everything else put > > into activesupport which will be builded on top of extlib. > > > So everyone should be happy: > > 1) There would be just one extensions library (well, one small and > > one big, but the point is it''s still DRY) > > 2) Rails will have AS, so Rails will be happy and smaller frameworks > > will have extlib, so they could be happy as well. > > > In case you guys won''t like this idea, there would be need for smaller > > extension library, so someone (probably me) will write it and code > > duplication, welcome back. > > > So what do you think? > > Active Support''s baseline resource consumption is nearly zero. It now > boots faster, creates fewer objects, and allocates less memory than > extlib. > > Why is wc -l your measure? > > Best, > jeremy-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right path. What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; It''s already neatly sectioned off. If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from it. require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without including the other stuff. You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to get to_sentence to co-operate. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Just to be clear, if there are cases where useful functionality of ActiveSupport is hidden behind dependencies that aren''t obviously necessary, I personally would consider that a bug, and improve the collection to make it easier to pick the parts that are needed. However, I haven''t seen any specific requests, or reports of dependency problems, so I don''t know what to fix. All I know is that we''ve spent considerable time making ActiveSupport suitable for smaller projects that don''t want to pull the entire thing in (with the base requirement consuming virtually no resources). I''d like to hear specific, concrete problems. I assure you I will take them seriously. Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com> wrote:> So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use > some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire > ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name > the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right path. > > What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what > other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails > Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; > It''s already neatly sectioned off. > > If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require > them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require > the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object > extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from it. > > require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' > require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' > > This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without > including the other stuff. > > You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to > get to_sentence to co-operate. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I understand. From what I could see, there wasn''t an "easy" way to require I18n, such as in my example of requiring the array extensions. Not too sure if this is important, but having a require ''activesupport/i18n'' would be handy. On 16/12/09 12:07 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:> Just to be clear, if there are cases where useful functionality of > ActiveSupport is hidden behind dependencies that aren''t obviously > necessary, I personally would consider that a bug, and improve the > collection to make it easier to pick the parts that are needed. > > However, I haven''t seen any specific requests, or reports of > dependency problems, so I don''t know what to fix. All I know is that > we''ve spent considerable time making ActiveSupport suitable for > smaller projects that don''t want to pull the entire thing in (with the > base requirement consuming virtually no resources). > > I''d like to hear specific, concrete problems. I assure you I will take > them seriously. > > Yehuda Katz > Developer | Engine Yard > (ph) 718.877.1325 > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com > <mailto:radarlistener@gmail.com>> wrote: > > So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want > to use > some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire > ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could > name > the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the > right path. > > What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what > other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails > Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; > It''s already neatly sectioned off. > > If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require > them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to > require > the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object > extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" > from it. > > require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' > require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' > > This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without > including the other stuff. > > You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to > get to_sentence to co-operate. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com > <mailto:rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com>. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > <mailto:rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Can you file a ticket. Let''s get this fixed! Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com> wrote:> I understand. > > From what I could see, there wasn''t an "easy" way to require I18n, such as > in my example of requiring the array extensions. Not too sure if this is > important, but having a require ''activesupport/i18n'' would be handy. > > > On 16/12/09 12:07 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > > Just to be clear, if there are cases where useful functionality of > ActiveSupport is hidden behind dependencies that aren''t obviously necessary, > I personally would consider that a bug, and improve the collection to make > it easier to pick the parts that are needed. > > However, I haven''t seen any specific requests, or reports of dependency > problems, so I don''t know what to fix. All I know is that we''ve spent > considerable time making ActiveSupport suitable for smaller projects that > don''t want to pull the entire thing in (with the base requirement consuming > virtually no resources). > > I''d like to hear specific, concrete problems. I assure you I will take > them seriously. > > Yehuda Katz > Developer | Engine Yard > (ph) 718.877.1325 > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com>wrote: > >> So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use >> some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire >> ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name >> the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right path. >> >> What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what >> other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails >> Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; >> It''s already neatly sectioned off. >> >> If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require >> them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require >> the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object >> extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from it. >> >> require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' >> require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' >> >> This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without >> including the other stuff. >> >> You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to >> get to_sentence to co-operate. >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com> wrote:> So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use > some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire > ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name > the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right path. > > What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what > other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails > Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; > It''s already neatly sectioned off. > > If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require > them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require > the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object > extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from it. > > require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' > require ''active_support/core_ext/array''Is there a specific reason why each pice won''t require its dependencies? I mean, if core_ext/array needs core_ext/object for Object#returning, why doesn''t it require at the top of the file? That would certainly make it easier on whoever wants to just use in_groups_of, since he doesn''t have to go through the NoMethodErrors (or with any luck, undefined constants, which means it breaks on "compile" time)> This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without > including the other stuff. > > You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to > get to_sentence to co-operate. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
That''s PRECISELY what we''ve been doing. If there are cases of dependencies that are not appropriately required, please file a bug so we can get it fixed. Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 2009/12/15 Nicolás Sanguinetti <godfoca@gmail.com>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com> > wrote: > > So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use > > some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire > > ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name > > the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right > path. > > > > What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what > > other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails > > Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; > > It''s already neatly sectioned off. > > > > If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require > > them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require > > the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object > > extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from > it. > > > > require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' > > require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' > > Is there a specific reason why each pice won''t require its > dependencies? I mean, if core_ext/array needs core_ext/object for > Object#returning, why doesn''t it require at the top of the file? > > That would certainly make it easier on whoever wants to just use > in_groups_of, since he doesn''t have to go through the NoMethodErrors > (or with any luck, undefined constants, which means it breaks on > "compile" time) > > > This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without > > including the other stuff. > > > > You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to > > get to_sentence to co-operate. > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > > > > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
On 14-Dec-09, at 4:26 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:> Are you otherwise concerned about the disk space occupied by > ActiveSupport? Please explain a bit more exactly what your > requirements are that prevent the use of ActiveSupport in Rails 3.Jakub''s concern does indeed seem to be disk space. Maybe a solution would be to develop a way to to easily redistribute parts of AS, for those developing other frameworks that only require small bits of it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I''d like to understand what scenario is implicating disk space here. Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Mateo Murphy <mateo.murphy@gmail.com>wrote:> > On 14-Dec-09, at 4:26 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > > > Are you otherwise concerned about the disk space occupied by > > ActiveSupport? Please explain a bit more exactly what your > > requirements are that prevent the use of ActiveSupport in Rails 3. > > Jakub''s concern does indeed seem to be disk space. Maybe a solution > would be to develop a way to to easily redistribute parts of AS, for > those developing other frameworks that only require small bits of it. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<rubyonrails-core%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com> wrote:> That''s PRECISELY what we''ve been doing. If there are cases of dependencies > that are not appropriately required, please file a bug so we can get it > fixed.Ah, sorry, I thought that, but Ryan''s message confused me :)> Yehuda Katz > Developer | Engine Yard > (ph) 718.877.1325 > > > 2009/12/15 Nicolás Sanguinetti <godfoca@gmail.com> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Ryan Bigg <radarlistener@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > So far, from my understanding, what you''ve said is that you want to use >> > some parts of ActiveSupport, but you don''t want to use the entire >> > ActiveSupport "collection". It would be helpful to us if you could name >> > the parts that you are wanting to use and we''ll set you on the right >> > path. >> > >> > What you need from ActiveSupport will of course be different from what >> > other people need from ActiveSupport. I don''t think it is up to Rails >> > Core to go through and rip out what you deem as important components; >> > It''s already neatly sectioned off. >> > >> > If you want only parts of ActiveSupport you''re going to have require >> > them yourself, and a bit more. Take for example if you wanted to require >> > the extensions to the Array class you need to also require the object >> > extensions too, since some methods require the method "returning" from >> > it. >> > >> > require ''active_support/core_ext/object'' >> > require ''active_support/core_ext/array'' >> >> Is there a specific reason why each pice won''t require its >> dependencies? I mean, if core_ext/array needs core_ext/object for >> Object#returning, why doesn''t it require at the top of the file? >> >> That would certainly make it easier on whoever wants to just use >> in_groups_of, since he doesn''t have to go through the NoMethodErrors >> (or with any luck, undefined constants, which means it breaks on >> "compile" time) >> >> > This will let you use methods such as in_groups_of and so on, without >> > including the other stuff. >> > >> > You''ll need to include other things as well sometimes, such as I18n to >> > get to_sentence to co-operate. >> > >> > -- >> > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. >> To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I''ll file some tickets later on tonight, good to know Rails Core is committed to something this simple and useful! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
First of all thanks all you guys for useful discussions. Yehuda wants some concrete things I don''t like on AS, so: 1) There is no reason why AS should have an executables. bin/ generate_tables is just messing my $PATH. It matter especially in bundled environment where I want to have my bin/ clean. 2) I don''t like that there is a lot of stuff which should be in separate gems. For example multibyte, cache, backtrace cleaner ... basically in my opinion in AS should be just core_exts and maybe some other generic things like callbacks. I believe this is not very good design. 3) Why is locale/en.yml in lib and therefore is de facto loadable (via load ''active_support/locale/en.yml'')? 1) & 3) isn''t so important, the most important for me is definitely 2). In Merb, there was huge amount of gems, Rails 2 are too monolithic, it would be nice to come with some reasonable design finally :) I would really put some less generic stuff into separate gems. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
As requested I have filed a ticket: https://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/3589-array-extension-standalone. Looking for further cases where this is broken too. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
I''ll do a sistematic pass over all core extensions checking these dependencies. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:> I''ll do a sistematic pass over all core extensions checking these dependencies.Done! I''ve found about 30 missing requires: http://github.com/fxn/rails There''s no way to ensure nothing has been left but it is a pass at least. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
Awesome - thanks Xavier! jeremy On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote:> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Xavier Noria <fxn@hashref.com> wrote: > >> I''ll do a sistematic pass over all core extensions checking these dependencies. > > Done! I''ve found about 30 missing requires: > > http://github.com/fxn/rails > > There''s no way to ensure nothing has been left but it is a pass at least. > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. > To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en. > > >-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.