Igal Koshevoy wrote:
> Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
>> Ruby based program to check ruby itself?  Does that really reliable?
>>   
> I think so. Stephen's RubyBuild can build a Ruby interpreter and my
> RubyCheck can run a battery of tests against it. If either of these
> simple Ruby programs fails, there's something wrong with the
> interpreter, which is what we're trying to catch anyway. Is this
> reasonable or is there a need for a shell-based solution?

If they fail Ruby is insane.  But their *not* failing do not always
result to ruby's sanity I think.  Am I wrong?