Re: [tlug] A Ruby question

[Alain Hoang <hoanga@??>]

burlingk@?? wrote:
> I am currently looking over the different scripting languages out there
> in an attempt to bring my coding skills more up to date.

	Always a noble cause :-)

>  
> I see that information on ruby lists rbx, rhtml, ruby, and rb as
> extensions associated with ruby scripts and libraries.

.rbx    -> Not sure off the top of my head
.rhtml  -> Usually means an HTML file with embedded ruby (erb)
           Similar to PHP or JSP
.ruby   -> I've never seen anyone use this as an extension.  I'd
           suggest NOT using it.
.rb     -> Extension for ruby scripts (by convention).  I'd suggest
           using these for any scripts you write in ruby and want
           to identify it as a ruby script

>  
> Which of these is most appropriate for a serverside script that would be
> accessed via a web browser (or rather which seems to be the most
> commonly used), and which would be so for a shell script?

	I'd say it depends.  Some people might like to stick with
cgi as the file extension name in the case they decide to swap out the
implementation CGI script with another language or make it transparent
to the user that the only thing they should really be aware of is that
it is a cgi program of sort.
	Some people would use .rb since they want to identify the
script as a ruby file and also it might be easier for identification
purposes if you're trying to use something like mod_ruby in your
webserver.


	I'm sure our other Ruby hackers on this ML will have their
own thoughts to add.

Cheers,
Alain