| 1 |
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Marvin Gülker <m-guelker@×××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 02. September 2017 um 22:57 Uhr +0200 schrieb Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>: |
| 3 |
>> OK, so disclaimer up front. I detest Ruby. I hate it with a passion. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> There is nothing one can do against that, but... |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> Each new minor version of ruby is a whole new language and the devs |
| 8 |
>> are OK with large breaking changes between minor version numbers. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> ...this is factually incorrect. There are new features added quite |
| 11 |
> often, but minor versions are generally backwards-compatible. The one |
| 12 |
> exception was the 1.8->1.9 switch years ago. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
One of the reasons I dislike Ruby is that there is no complete |
| 15 |
specification of the language available, making this statement |
| 16 |
(technically) untestable. Seeing as the OP is saying there are 3 |
| 17 |
versions queued for merge and he has not installed any of them by hand |
| 18 |
it looks like Alan is right. Perhaps the OP is using "old" Ruby based |
| 19 |
software, but software of that age in another language could work on |
| 20 |
new interpreters. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Cheers, |
| 23 |
R0b0t1. |
Archives