Urabe Shyouhei wrote:
> If they fail Ruby is insane.  But their *not* failing do not always
> result to ruby's sanity I think.  Am I wrong?
>   
If the RubyBuild or RubyChecker programs fail to run with only a 
specific version of Ruby, then that Ruby interpreter is probably insane.

However, if they run all the way through, then we need to manually 
determine how sane the Ruby interpreter is by reviewing the reports that 
the checker produced by running the test suites.

For example, I run the checker against my patched version of p111 and 
then again with your latest SVN release. When the checks finish, I use 
gvimdiff (or meld, kdiff3, etc) to visually compare the reports (e.g., 
output of the RSpec test suite) to determine if the new version if 
failing tests that worked with the previous version, and then review 
these tests to see why they're failing. We should be able to automate 
some of this inspection step too and let it provide a special report 
with just the failures between two versions, but it's quite usable just 
with a good diff utility.

Does this answer your questions?

-igal