Hi, does someone know when the 1.9.0 will be released?
sayoyo Sayoyo wrote:
Hi, does someone know when the 1.9.0 will be released?
Traditionally, these sorts of things are xmas presents.
Regards,
On Nov 29, 2007 11:45 PM, Bil K. [email protected] wrote:
sayoyo Sayoyo wrote:
Hi, does someone know when the 1.9.0 will be released?
Traditionally, these sorts of things are xmas presents.
Regards,
Bil K.
http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov
And this Christmas we will get not Ruby 2.0, but Ruby 1.9.1 which will
be the stable release of the 1.9 stream. Future changes to the 1.9
stream will be bug fixing and performance tuning. Any new experimental
features past 1.9 would then go into a new 2.0 stream.
Matz and the core team recently changed the release numbering scheme
which got quite a bit of discussion on ruby-core.
–
Rick DeNatale
My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Hi –
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Rick DeNatale wrote:
And this Christmas we will get not Ruby 2.0, but Ruby 1.9.1 which will
be the stable release of the 1.9 stream.
I’m not sure how stable, though. Matz said at RubyConf that it would
come out at Christmas but probably not be as stable as he had hoped.
I think it will be feature-frozen, though, or nearly so.
David
On Nov 30, 2007 8:18 AM, David A. Black [email protected] wrote:
Regards,
Bil K.
http://fun3d.larc.nasa.govAnd this Christmas we will get not Ruby 2.0, but Ruby 1.9.1 which will
be the stable release of the 1.9 stream.I’m not sure how stable, though. Matz said at RubyConf that it would
come out at Christmas but probably not be as stable as he had hoped.
I think it will be feature-frozen, though, or nearly so.
That’s how I interpret stable.
The idea is that at Christmas the definition of 1.9 will be frozen,
and folks will be encouraged to start porting to it, no more moving
target.
Although stable it might not yet be considered production quality,
which will happen over time.
–
Rick DeNatale
My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Hi –
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Rick DeNatale wrote:
I think it will be feature-frozen, though, or nearly so.
That’s how I interpret stable.
My interpretation was with respect to the running of the thing itself
– I think what you’re calling not production-ready. Anyway, whatever
the terminology, the signal from Matz seemed to be that 1.9.1 was the
way of the future, but that its release should not be taken as a sign
to abandon 1.8, which he still considers the stable (or robust, or
production-ready) version. But we’ll see – there’s still more than
three weeks before Christmas 
David
On Dec 1, 2007, at 2:38 AM, David A. Black wrote:
sayoyo Sayoyo wrote:
which will
the terminology, the signal from Matz seemed to be that 1.9.1 was the
way of the future, but that its release should not be taken as a sign
to abandon 1.8, which he still considers the stable (or robust, or
production-ready) version. But we’ll see – there’s still more than
three weeks before ChristmasDavid
It’s good to know that 1.8.x is not being abandoned outright. I’d be
shocked if it were.
There is so much code out there now that is totally dependent upon
it, and more importantly, from the general sense I’ve gotten from the
occasional 1.9 posts here, there are a lot of changes in 1.9 that
will take some time to get familiar with.
No big deal, but I’d like to wait until there are some published
books before considering spending time on learning 1.9
Any word on the unicode support in 1.9? Or is that still scheduled as
a 2.x feature?
John J. wrote:
Any word on the unicode support in 1.9? Or is that still scheduled as a
2.x feature?
It’s in, and changes many methods of String in breaking ways since they
work with characters instead of bytes now. That will probably be the
largest change any library or app needs to make to upgrade.
- Charlie
On Nov 30, 2007, at 7:30 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
come out at Christmas but probably not be as stable as he had hoped.
–
Rick DeNataleMy blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
How rough is it ?
Unicode support is pretty convenient and useful working with OS X,
since Cocoa’s NSString class is natively Unicode.
Where is Unicode not convenient really? Seriously, it was conceived in
'91
or so to fill a genuine need, it is about time.
I know it is not perfect (I have understood there are at least some
issues
with supporting the asian character sets well) but it is a definite step
forwards.
On Dec 1, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Charles Oliver N. wrote:
John J. wrote:
Any word on the unicode support in 1.9? Or is that still scheduled
as a 2.x feature?It’s in, and changes many methods of String in breaking ways since
they work with characters instead of bytes now. That will probably
be the largest change any library or app needs to make to upgrade.
- Charlie
Excellent news!
Then I’m eager and ready to jump into it any time!
I just hope Apple rolls out 1.9.x in an update to Leopard, it would
be a shame to leave it out until 10.6…
Unicode support is pretty convenient and useful working with OS X,
since Cocoa’s NSString class is natively Unicode.
(now if only TextMate were able to handle Japanese input correctly…)
Actually, though, the unicode support will (hopefully) help put an
end to people having difficulty dealing with non-ASCII file names in
particular.
On Dec 1, 2007, at 4:19 PM, Trollen L. wrote:
with supporting the asian character sets well) but it is a definite
step
forwards.
True.
Depends which asian character sets.
One troublesome thing is being sure you have a font that includes the
characters you need, or having some way of substituting another font
that has the desired characters to display them.
Japanese fonts alone can be huge, covering several languages in one
font. This can be convenient where storage space is an issue while
supporting multiple languages.
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Trollen L. wrote:
Unicode support is pretty convenient and useful working with OS X,
since Cocoa’s NSString class is natively Unicode.Where is Unicode not convenient really? Seriously, it was conceived in '91
or so to fill a genuine need, it is about time.
I know it is not perfect (I have understood there are at least some issues
with supporting the asian character sets well) but it is a definite step
forwards.
Depends. I understand that there is not one system file (as in
/etc) on my unix box in UTF-8. Thus if doing everything in Unicode
gives you a penalty of X percent (see above article), then it will be
felt when most of your code is manipulating system text files - like
scripts often do.
*t
–
Patrick A. wrote:
How about Ruby 2.0 release? I thought 1.9 was suppose to be an
experimental branch and that 2.0 would be the true next stable
release. Is 2.0 planed for next year or is it planned for (much)
later?
I understood the comments given by Matz, that the development of 2.0
didn’t start yet. The official release software “Ruby 1.9.n” (n>=1) will
contain features, that go into the direction of “Ruby 2”.
During the last months I played a little bit with the nightly builds of
Ruby 1.9, and I did some planned tests, because I’m really waiting for
the m17n features, that will be in the kernel of Ruby 1.9. I think it is
a good idea to have a stable Ruby 1.9 for a while, because the
discussions about future enhancements in respect to Ruby 2 will have a
practical background when Ruby 1.9 is in use for a while.
I hope we will have a Ruby 1.9.2 or 1.9.3, that will be stable enough
for all usage scenarios, and that will be available in system
distributions and as OneClickInstaller version for Windows.
Then we do have time for Ruby 2.
Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner
How about Ruby 2.0 release? I thought 1.9 was suppose to be an
experimental branch and that 2.0 would be the true next stable
release. Is 2.0 planed for next year or is it planned for (much)
later?
During the last months I played a little bit with the nightly builds of
Ruby 1.9, and I did some planned tests, because I’m really waiting for
the m17n features, that will be in the kernel of Ruby 1.9. I think it is
a good idea to have a stable Ruby 1.9 for a while, because the
discussions about future enhancements in respect to Ruby 2 will have a
practical background when Ruby 1.9 is in use for a while.
I must say I too am confused between what will go in 1.9 and what will
have to wait for 2.0. Is there any place where things are nicely
explained?
Diego V.
Diego V. wrote:
Is there any place where things are nicely explained?
A good idea may be to go through http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/126701
in detail.
Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner
Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner wrote:
Patrick A. wrote:
How about Ruby 2.0 release? I thought 1.9 was suppose to be an
experimental branch and that 2.0 would be the true next stable
release. Is 2.0 planed for next year or is it planned for (much)
later?I understood the comments given by Matz, that the development of 2.0
didn’t start yet. The official release software “Ruby 1.9.n” (n>=1) will
contain features, that go into the direction of “Ruby 2”.
It’s worth mentioning that with 1.9 stabilizing a bit in 1.9.1, JRuby
will soon support the same set of features. We’re aiming for sometime
shortly after the big 1.1 release, and it will include stabby lambdas,
the new string, syntax changes, and updated stdlib as well. We’ll
continue to track Ruby features as they come along.
I would also like to be able to provide some of the features with 1.8
semantics, like stabby lambdas (since they wouldn’t break anything). At
any rate, the plan currently is to have support for both 1.8 and 1.9 in
the same JRuby install, configurable with a command-line flag.
- stabby lambda refers to the new literal lambda syntax:
my_lamda = ->{ puts ‘hello’}
- Charlie