Next Official Ruby Version

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner, Jul 26, 2005.

  1. Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby 2, that means a version called 1.10 or so?

    --
    Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner
     
    Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner, Jul 26, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Eric Hodel Guest

    On 26 Jul 2005, at 13:15, Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner wrote:

    > Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby 2, =20
    > that means a version called 1.10 or so?


    1.8.3 will be the next stable release. A preview was released in =20
    May, IIRC.

    --=20
    Eric Hodel - - http://segment7.net
    FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
     
    Eric Hodel, Jul 26, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Jeff Wood Guest

    Is there a release calendar for Ruby ... I've never looked for one ...
    but figured the question might have an interesting answer.

    j.

    On 7/26/05, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    >=20
    > On 26 Jul 2005, at 13:15, Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner wrote:
    >=20
    > > Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby 2,
    > > that means a version called 1.10 or so?

    >=20
    > 1.8.3 will be the next stable release. A preview was released in
    > May, IIRC.
    >=20
    > --
    > Eric Hodel - - http://segment7.net
    > FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20



    --=20
    "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

    Jeff Wood
     
    Jeff Wood, Jul 26, 2005
    #3
  4. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Jeff Wood Guest

    Also, I've seen documents that point to version 1.9 as the integration
    point for oniguruma ( sp? ) ...

    ... haven't seen much news on the 1.9.x releases either.

    j.

    On 7/26/05, Jeff Wood <> wrote:
    > Is there a release calendar for Ruby ... I've never looked for one ...
    > but figured the question might have an interesting answer.
    >=20
    > j.
    >=20
    > On 7/26/05, Eric Hodel <> wrote:
    > >
    > > On 26 Jul 2005, at 13:15, Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner wrote:
    > >
    > > > Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby 2,
    > > > that means a version called 1.10 or so?

    > >
    > > 1.8.3 will be the next stable release. A preview was released in
    > > May, IIRC.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Eric Hodel - - http://segment7.net
    > > FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >=20
    >=20
    > --
    > "So long, and thanks for all the fish"
    >=20
    > Jeff Wood
    >=20



    --=20
    "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

    Jeff Wood
     
    Jeff Wood, Jul 26, 2005
    #4
  5. "Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:...
    > Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby 2, that means a version called 1.10 or so?
    >
    > --
    > Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner
    >
    >
    >


    Ooops - I mean a Version that is based on Ruby 1.9, sorry for my wrong formulation.
     
    Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner, Jul 26, 2005
    #5
  6. Hello Wolfgang,

    WND> "Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner" <> schrieb im
    WND> Newsbeitrag news:...
    >> Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby
    >> 2, that means a version called 1.10 or so?
    >>
    >> --
    >> Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner
    >>
    >>
    >>


    WND> Ooops - I mean a Version that is based on Ruby 1.9, sorry for my wro=
    ng formulation.

    For some reasons there will be no 1.10 (release number will
    never be two digit). So 1.9 will end up in Ruby 2.0 and this means it
    will integrate YARV, the new bytecode/JIT compiler. Only God and
    Buddha knows when the time for this will come.

    If everything works as expected i think 1.8.3 will be out on
    christmas. (1.8.1 + 1.8.2 very both released on one of the christmas
    days, and also started with previews in jun, so i expect it will be
    the same this year).



    --=20
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions d=
    ot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
    =20
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jul 27, 2005
    #6
  7. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Jeff Wood Guest

    Lothar,

    First, thanks for the information, that makes sense ...

    Second, 1.9 is where we're going to see oniguruma (spelling?) ...
    right? Does anybody know what other features Matz has planned for us?

    And Third, I've always wanted to know, I'm impressed with your work on
    the Arachno IDE, but, why didn't you write it in Ruby? What made you
    choose Haskell?

    j.

    On 7/26/05, Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    > Hello Wolfgang,
    >=20
    > WND> "Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner" <> schrieb im
    > WND> Newsbeitrag news:...
    > >> Is it somehow planned to build a new official Ruby before Ruby
    > >> 2, that means a version called 1.10 or so?
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Wolfgang N=E1dasi-Donner
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>

    >=20
    > WND> Ooops - I mean a Version that is based on Ruby 1.9, sorry for my wro=

    ng formulation.
    >=20
    > For some reasons there will be no 1.10 (release number will
    > never be two digit). So 1.9 will end up in Ruby 2.0 and this means it
    > will integrate YARV, the new bytecode/JIT compiler. Only God and
    > Buddha knows when the time for this will come.
    >=20
    > If everything works as expected i think 1.8.3 will be out on
    > christmas. (1.8.1 + 1.8.2 very both released on one of the christmas
    > days, and also started with previews in jun, so i expect it will be
    > the same this year).
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20
    > --
    > Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions d=

    ot com
    > Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    > CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20



    --=20
    "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

    Jeff Wood
     
    Jeff Wood, Jul 27, 2005
    #7
  8. Hello Jeff,

    JW> the Arachno IDE, but, why didn't you write it in Ruby? What made you
    JW> choose Haskell?

    It's Eiffel not Haskell. But for most guys its on the same exotic
    languages level.

    A script language is just not powerfull enough for this task (speed,
    memory consumption and yes, speed) to do this.

    For Ruby specific tasks i run simpler ruby scripts. And some parts are
    written in Python but the core must be written in a static typed garbage
    collected native compiled and imperative high level language. And
    there he number of choices was very low in 2001.

    Today i would choose a more cleaner D + Python system.

    Ruby was never an option as it does not support native threads.


    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jul 27, 2005
    #8
  9. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Jeff Wood Guest

    I agree that D is pretty neat.

    ... beyond that, why would you choose Python over Ruby? ( Just
    asking, not trying to be flamebait or anything )

    On 7/27/05, Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    > Hello Jeff,
    >=20
    > JW> the Arachno IDE, but, why didn't you write it in Ruby? What made you
    > JW> choose Haskell?
    >=20
    > It's Eiffel not Haskell. But for most guys its on the same exotic
    > languages level.
    >=20
    > A script language is just not powerfull enough for this task (speed,
    > memory consumption and yes, speed) to do this.
    >=20
    > For Ruby specific tasks i run simpler ruby scripts. And some parts are
    > written in Python but the core must be written in a static typed garbage
    > collected native compiled and imperative high level language. And
    > there he number of choices was very low in 2001.
    >=20
    > Today i would choose a more cleaner D + Python system.
    >=20
    > Ruby was never an option as it does not support native threads.
    >=20
    >=20
    > --
    > Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions d=

    ot com
    > Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    > CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20



    --=20
    "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

    Jeff Wood
     
    Jeff Wood, Jul 27, 2005
    #9
  10. Hello Jeff,

    JW> I agree that D is pretty neat.

    JW> ... beyond that, why would you choose Python over Ruby? ( Just
    JW> asking, not trying to be flamebait or anything )

    Ruby is without the nicer and cleaner language, but Python still
    has better libraries and implementation (native threads, multiple
    separated interpreters and bytecode for source code obfuscation)

    I use Ruby whenever i can, but in some application domains Ruby is
    unfortunately still not very useable.

    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jul 27, 2005
    #10
  11. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Jeff Wood Guest

    Thank you very much for your insight ... I believe that your opinion
    is dead on for production/shrink-wrap coding.

    Thank you for having this chat. It's been enlightening.

    j.

    On 7/27/05, Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    > Hello Jeff,
    >=20
    > JW> I agree that D is pretty neat.
    >=20
    > JW> ... beyond that, why would you choose Python over Ruby? ( Just
    > JW> asking, not trying to be flamebait or anything )
    >=20
    > Ruby is without the nicer and cleaner language, but Python still
    > has better libraries and implementation (native threads, multiple
    > separated interpreters and bytecode for source code obfuscation)
    >=20
    > I use Ruby whenever i can, but in some application domains Ruby is
    > unfortunately still not very useable.
    >=20
    > --
    > Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions d=

    ot com
    > Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    > CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20
    >=20



    --=20
    "So long, and thanks for all the fish"

    Jeff Wood
     
    Jeff Wood, Jul 27, 2005
    #11
  12. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Mark Probert Guest

    Hi ..

    On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 17:54 +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote:
    >
    > Today i would choose a more cleaner D + Python system.
    >


    What is it that you like about D? Personally, I was always impressed by
    Mr Bright's work and this seems to be a nice continuation. Do you feel
    that it is ready for production use?


    --
    -mark. (probertm at acm dot org)
     
    Mark Probert, Jul 27, 2005
    #12
  13. Mark Probert <> wrote:
    > Hi ..
    >
    > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 17:54 +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote:
    > >
    > > Today i would choose a more cleaner D + Python system.

    >
    > What is it that you like about D? Personally, I was always impressed by
    > Mr Bright's work and this seems to be a nice continuation. Do you feel
    > that it is ready for production use?


    I'd be interested too, particularly as regards usability for GUI
    programs (preferably GTK).

    martin
     
    Martin DeMello, Jul 28, 2005
    #13
  14. Hello Mark,


    MP> What is it that you like about D? Personally, I was always impressed by
    MP> Mr Bright's work and this seems to be a nice continuation. Do you feel
    MP> that it is ready for production use?

    No. It's beta. The recent change in the hash semantic shows
    this. Think that it still takes a year or two. Also a few features
    like the method delegates are far from perfect (they should
    look at Eiffels agents to see a good implementation) and they are
    essential as GUI callbacks.

    What i like about D?

    Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?

    Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?

    I don't see any at the moment.

    A C# compiler that does not generate .NET code would be nice but
    its not there.

    Still the same as 20 years ago, the Hardware is much faster developed
    then the software. From this point of view i'm scared with the
    new dual core CPU's in desktop machines. When will we get good
    languages that support multithreading with some modern concepts ?
    "occam" for the transputer was one idea, still have this occam book on
    the shelf and "scoop" from the eiffel world another one.


    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jul 28, 2005
    #14
  15. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Mark Probert Guest

    [OT] languages (was: Re: Next Official Ruby Version)

    Hi ..

    On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 18:04 +0900, Lothar Scholz wrote:

    > No. It's beta.


    That was also my take on it. Though some of the semantics and included
    libraries are nice. Certainly an improvement on C++.

    >
    > Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >
    > Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    > gotchas of C++, will work for large projects ... compiles to native
    > executable, is statically typed,
    > has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?
    >

    ocaml? Not that I have used it in anger ...


    > A C# compiler that does not generate .NET code would be nice but
    > its not there.
    >

    Or an Oberon-2 compiler without the junk and with decent libraries.

    ;-)

    Regards,

    --
    -mark. (probertm at acm dot org)
     
    Mark Probert, Jul 28, 2005
    #15
  16. Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    > Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >
    > Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    > gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    > do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    > has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?


    Erlang and OCaml come to mind (not saying they're as suitable as D for a
    C++ replacement, but they meet all the criteria above).

    martin
     
    Martin DeMello, Jul 28, 2005
    #16
  17. Wolfgang Nádasi-Donner

    Ara.T.Howard Guest

    [OT] Re: Next Official Ruby Version

    On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Martin DeMello wrote:

    > Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    >> Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >>
    >> Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    >> gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    >> do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    >> has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?

    >
    > Erlang and OCaml come to mind (not saying they're as suitable as D for a
    > C++ replacement, but they meet all the criteria above).


    have you used D martin?

    -a
    --
    ===============================================================================
    | email :: ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
    | phone :: 303.497.6469
    | My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness.
    | --Tenzin Gyatso
    ===============================================================================
     
    Ara.T.Howard, Jul 28, 2005
    #17
  18. Hello Martin,

    MD> Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    >> Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >>
    >> Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    >> gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    >> do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    >> has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?


    MD> Erlang and OCaml come to mind (not saying they're as suitable as D for a
    MD> C++ replacement, but they meet all the criteria above).

    I forgot OO on my criteria list, so Erlang is also off the list.

    Oberon2 and Modula3 meet this goals but i find both are too simple.


    --
    Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
    Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
    CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
     
    Lothar Scholz, Jul 28, 2005
    #18
  19. Martin DeMello wrote:
    > Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    >
    >>Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >>
    >>Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    >>gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    >>do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    >>has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?

    >
    >
    > Erlang and OCaml come to mind (not saying they're as suitable as D for a
    > C++ replacement, but they meet all the criteria above).


    Erlang is not statically typed, nor does it have a native code compiler
    as far as I know. From the Erlang FAQ:

    <quote>
    1.4. What sort of problems is Erlang not particularly suitable for?

    Anything where constant-factors are crucial for performance, such as
    image processing, signal processing, sorting large volumes of data,
    device drivers and low-level protocol termination.

    Most (all?) large systems developed using Erlang make heavy use of C for
    low-level code, leaving Erlang to manage the parts which tend to be
    complex in other languages, like controlling systems spread across
    several machines and implementing complex protocol logic.
    </quote>

    Adam.
     
    Adam P. Jenkins, Jul 28, 2005
    #19
  20. Martin DeMello ha scritto:
    > Lothar Scholz <> wrote:
    >
    >>Well, tell me where are the alternatives ?
    >>
    >>Show me some for a higher level language that does not have the
    >>gotchas of C++, will work for large projects (SmartEiffel does not
    >>do this well), compiles to native executable, is statically typed,
    >>has a garbage collector and is available on MacOSX,Linux,Win32 ?

    >
    >
    > Erlang and OCaml come to mind (not saying they're as suitable as D for a
    > C++ replacement, but they meet all the criteria above).


    is'nt erlang dynamically tiped
    (with external optional type inferencers) ?
     
    gabriele renzi, Jul 29, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Deniz Bahar
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    513
    Andrey Tarasevich
    Mar 9, 2005
  2. V Green
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    925
    V Green
    Feb 5, 2008
  3. PA Bear [MS MVP]
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,036
    PA Bear [MS MVP]
    Feb 5, 2008
  4. Limin Fu
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    451
    Daniel Fetchinson
    Mar 7, 2009
  5. Limin Fu
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    117
    Tim Greer
    Mar 6, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page