As I was posting on my Flex blog, I started to wonder if there's a design assumption going on that I hadn't considered.
I was thinking that Ruby could use a repository where individuals can share modules. Basically, a large collection of software and documentation.
Or do we?
Take Perl. Do you want to turn your Perl script into a CGI system? Go to CPAN -- the Comprehensive Perl Archive Network -- and grab the CGI module (okay, bad example, it's included in the standard distribution, but you get the idea). CPAN has bazillions of modules, and is an invaluable resource for handling whatever you need to handle. Proofs of concepts get hammered out, new ideas get born, and thoughtful robust code is freely available. All in one practical place.
But, perhaps Ruby has a higher level of focus. I see RubyForge: support for "projects", i.e. full applications, hinting that the modules there require just a bit too much cohesion to be generally useful. Instead of plug-in modules that you can use to add functionality to an application, does Ruby tend to focus on the applications (or projects) themselves?
No comments:
Post a Comment