Slashdot Mirror


Move Over AJAX, Make Room for ARAX

sasserstyl writes "eWeek reports that Microsoft's Silverlight platform will support Ruby client-side scripting, enabling ARAX — or Asynchronous Ruby and XML. Would be cool to have the option to script client-side in something other than Javascript. 'In essence, using ARAX, Ruby developers would not have to go through the machinations of using something like the RJS (Ruby JavaScript) utility, where they write Ruby code and RJS generates JavaScript code to run on the client, Lam said. "Sure, you could do it that way, but then at some point you might have to add some JavaScript code that adds some custom functionality on the client yourself," he said. "So there's always that sense of, 'Now I'm in another world. And wouldn't it be nice if I have this utility class I wrote in Ruby...' Today if I want to use it in the browser I have to port it to JavaScript. Now I can just run it in the browser."'"

9 of 409 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Um, my browser doesn't support Ruby by Reverend528 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Last week they embraced ruby. Now they are extending it. I can't wait to see what they'll do next!

  2. Re:Move over ARAX by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey Balmer!

    I've put together a language and framework.

    I call them Diamond and Diamond-On-Wings.

    They're not very good... rather cumbersome and don't scale very well, but they give you something flashy with only 3 lines of code, and I've got a ton of amateur developers who haven't learned well enough not to use it yet on board.

    Can I have a blowjob too?

    Come on... Developers, Developers, Developers!!! and all that jazz...

    On your knees, fat man!

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  3. Re:Um, my browser doesn't support Ruby by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm not seeing a problem.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  4. Hmmm... by Mr+Z · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe we need an infrastructure for this. An infrastructure that would be common among multiple languages. And then you could run any language that can target this common language infrastructure. And if you manage it properly it could be secure....

    See, that's sharp isn't it? Of course, it might seem like I'm parroting a bunch of buzzwords in this monologue, but I really have a message... I'm not just making small talk. I think that's enough pearls of wisdom in one post.

    --Joe
  5. Re:Do we really need this? by urcreepyneighbor · · Score: 4, Funny

    Silverlight is going to allow .NET code, not just Ruby. Sweet jesus. It's ActiveX 2.
    --
    "The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
  6. Use arax, raggy! by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ruby ruby roo!

    --
    stuff |
  7. Re:Um, my browser doesn't support Ruby by Reverend528 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Every language is for people who hate perl. Everyone hates perl. Especially perl developers.

  8. And ARAX isn't as good as AJAX by einhverfr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ajax has always been second-best to Achilles, the greatest hero of the Trojan war. In other words, the only thing better than Ajax would be Achilles (maybe Asynchronous C or Haskall In Lisp List Extensible Style).

    Who was this Arax fellow? What wars did he fight in?

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  9. Why only people like us come here by sm62704 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ruby
    rails
    Ruby on rails
    Soap
    Ajax
    Ajax soap
    Python
    Perl
    Java

    Is it any wonder normal people think we're strange? (Ignore the rest of this comment, as it presently has too few characters per line (currently 8.5) but thankfully I can paste slashdot's retarded "error" message in the comment to correct this travesty)

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest