Support for Ruby 1.9?

I'm trying to compile FXRuby under Ruby 1.9.0.  After
applying the below 
patch, I get the error:

FXRbApp.cpp: In member function 'long int 
FXRbApp::onChoreThreads(FX::FXObject*, FX::FXSelector,
void*)':
FXRbApp.cpp:98: error: 'CHECK_INTS' was not declared in this
scope

I would fix this, but I'm not familiar with what this code
is doing.

Any estimate on support for 1.9 in FXRuby?  I only ask
because I'm 
trying to add support for 1.9 to my extensions, and I end up
building 
FXRuby in the process.

Thanks,

Kevin

Index: pre-config.rb
============================================================
=======
--- pre-config.rb    (revision 921)
+++ pre-config.rb    (working copy)
 -20,7
+20,7 
 def fox_include_files_found?
   search_directories.each do |path|
     filename = File.join(path, "fxver.h")
-    return true if FileTest.exists?(filename)
+    return true if FileTest.exist?(filename)
   end
   false
 end
 -44,7
+44,7 
 def installed_fox_version
   search_directories.each do |path|
     filename = File.join(path, "fxver.h")
-    if FileTest.exists?(filename)
+    if FileTest.exist?(filename)
       foxMajor, foxMinor, foxLevel =
read_fox_version(filename)
       return [foxMajor, foxMinor, foxLevel].join('.')
     end
Index: ext/fox16/extconf.rb
============================================================
=======
--- ext/fox16/extconf.rb    (revision 921)
+++ ext/fox16/extconf.rb    (working copy)
 -20,7
+20,7 
  
   incdirs.each do |incdir|
     filename = File.join(incdir, "fxver.h")
-    if FileTest.exists?(filename)
+    if FileTest.exist?(filename)
       idircflag = "-I" + incdir
       $CPPFLAGS += " " + idircflag unless 
$CPPFLAGS.split.include?(idircflag)
       return
 -50,7
+50,7 
  
   incdirs.each do |incdir|
     filename = File.join(incdir,
"FXScintilla.h")
-    if FileTest.exists?(filename)
+    if FileTest.exist?(filename)
       $autodetected_fxscintilla = true
       idircflag = "-I" + incdir
       $CPPFLAGS += " " + idircflag unless 
$CPPFLAGS.split.include?(idircflag)
 -87,11
+87,11 
   $libs = append_library($libs, "FOX-1.6")
   $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " -fpermissive -DWIN32
-Iinclude"
   if is_fxscintilla_build?
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
     $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " -DWITH_FXSCINTILLA
-DHAVE_FOX_1_6"
     $libs = append_library($libs, "fxscintilla")
   else
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
   end
 end
 
 -113,11
+113,11 
   $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " /DWIN32 /DUNICODE /GR /GX
/Iinclude"
   $LOCAL_LIBS = $LOCAL_LIBS + "FOX-1.6.lib"
   if is_fxscintilla_build?
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
     $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " /DWITH_FXSCINTILLA
/DHAVE_FOX_1_6"
     $libs = append_library($libs, "fxscintilla")
   else
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
   end
 end
 
 -139,11
+139,11 
   $libs = append_library($libs, "FOX-1.6")
   $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " -O0 -Iinclude"
   if is_fxscintilla_build?
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak')
     $CFLAGS = $CFLAGS + " -DWITH_FXSCINTILLA
-DHAVE_FOX_1_6"
     $libs = append_library($libs, "fxscintilla")
   else
-    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exists?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
+    File.move('scintilla_wrap.cpp',
'scintilla_wrap.cpp.bak') if 
FileTest.exist?('scintilla_wrap.cpp')
   end
 end
 
Index: install.rb
============================================================
=======
--- install.rb    (revision 921)
+++ install.rb    (working copy)
 -237,7
+237,6 
       table[k] = default
     end
   end
-  private :init
 
   def save
     File.open(SAVE_FILE, 'w') {|f|




http://www.systemware.com/


_______________________________________________
fxruby-users mailing list
fxruby-usersrubyforge.org
ht
tp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/fxruby-users

On 4/17/07, Kevin Burge <kevin.burgesystemware.com> wrote:

> Any estimate on support for 1.9 in FXRuby?  I only ask
because I'm
> trying to add support for 1.9 to my extensions, and I
end up building
> FXRuby in the process.

Yikes, Ruby 1.9 wasn't even on my radar screen yet. Since
you've
actually done some stuff with it -- Is it stable enough to
even try
out yet? I know the official release won't be until the end
of the
year (or whatever), but is it kinda working at this point?

I will file a bug report about adding Ruby 1.9 support and
see what I can do.
_______________________________________________
fxruby-users mailing list
fxruby-usersrubyforge.org
ht
tp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/fxruby-users

Lyle Johnson wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Kevin Burge <kevin.burgesystemware.com> wrote:
> 
>> Any estimate on support for 1.9 in FXRuby?  I only
ask because I'm
>> trying to add support for 1.9 to my extensions, and
I end up building
>> FXRuby in the process.
> 
> Yikes, Ruby 1.9 wasn't even on my radar screen yet.
Since you've
> actually done some stuff with it -- Is it stable enough
to even try
> out yet? I know the official release won't be until the
end of the
> year (or whatever), but is it kinda working at this
point?

As far as I can tell, ruby1.9 has always been functional. 
It has
remained more or less stable since the YARV merge last
December.
There are relatively minor changes to the C api, but nothing
earth
shattering for .so writers.
The only big gotcha is that ruby1.9 does away with
continuations and
that yarv is a little bit more multithread aware (not quite,
really, but
you need to prepare for it), so some of the internal stuff
in eval.c is
quite different.
SWIG should already be 1.9 aware, as far as I can tell.

PS.  Talking about SWIG.  As a result of me wrapping FLTK
and the Maya
API library under it, I've submitted 4 patches to the latest
SWIG for
ruby.  Two are for relatively serious bugs in it (that could
potentially
crash it on some rare ocassions).  I'm not sure if Fox could
benefit
from those (Fox mainly uses its own classes and relatively
little of the
features swig).

-- 
Gonzalo Garramuņo
ggarraadvancedsl.com.ar

AMD4400 - ASUS48N-E
GeForce7300GT
Kubuntu Edgy
_______________________________________________
fxruby-users mailing list
fxruby-usersrubyforge.org
ht
tp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/fxruby-users

On 4/17/07, gga <ggarraadvancedsl.com.ar>
wrote:

> As far as I can tell, ruby1.9 has always been
functional.  It has
> remained more or less stable since the YARV merge last
December.
> There are relatively minor changes to the C api, but
nothing earth
> shattering for .so writers.

OK.

> PS.  Talking about SWIG.  As a result of me wrapping
FLTK and the Maya
> API library under it, I've submitted 4 patches to the
latest SWIG for
> ruby.  Two are for relatively serious bugs in it (that
could potentially
> crash it on some rare ocassions).  I'm not sure if Fox
could benefit
> from those (Fox mainly uses its own classes and
relatively little of the
> features swig).

Yes, the hard parts of FXRuby were completed before SWIG got
some of
its more recent useful features (like the director classes
support),
and there was some breakage for multiple modules for several
releases.
I will probably upgrade to a more recent SWIG at some point,
but right
now I'm using a modified version of SWIG 1.3.22.
_______________________________________________
fxruby-users mailing list
fxruby-usersrubyforge.org
ht
tp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/fxruby-users