Issue #17490 has been updated by k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun).


I get your points. Nothing is technically wrong in what you're saying, and as a committer like you it's easier to interpret MJIT.

But I mean, I assume we're not writing a release note for people like us who can just read details in NEWS but writing it for people who are just not interested in such details. Saying "JIT became faster" to just get an attention from wider people (and writing details only hurts it), and if people really care about "which JIT is it?", they should go to NEWS as instructed.

----------------------------------------
Feature #17490: Rename RubyVM::MJIT to RubyVM::JIT
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17490#change-89721

* Author: k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
## Background
In my understanding, MJIT is a codename like YARV which many people outside Ruby community are not familiar with, so I've used JIT in NEWS or release notes to avoid explaining the "M" part whenever we release a new version. However, because we have the name "MJIT" in one of our constants, we've had some naming inconsistency. For instance, --jit is not --mjit and it's not consistent.

## Proposal
Have the same constant as `RubyVM::JIT`, deprecate `RubyVM::MJIT` from Ruby 3.1, and remove the old one in Ruby 3.2.

## Impact
This impacts only [Feature #14830] `RubyVM::MJIT.pause` / `RubyVM::MJIT.resume`, which is basically for k0kubun's own testing.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>