Le 16/4/2005, "James Edward Gray II" <james / grayproductions.net> a
rit:
>On Apr 15, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Pe, Botp wrote:
>
>> it is good but would that break a lot of (old) things? In that case, 
>> will
>> Ruby 2 be a different ruby?
>
>I believe that release is planned as a fix for any lingering issues, if 
>if a little compatibility must be sacrificed to get there.  That way we 
>can find all new issues.  ;)

The philosophy was that breakage is maximized at
2.0, minimized afterwards. Whether this means that
Matz-ue is deliberately looking to break stuff I do
not know ;)

I am still hoping my beloved first-order functions
are included, myself.

>Of course, I could be way off base.  We're well of my map now...
>
>James Edward Gray II

E

--
No-one expects the Solaris POSIX implementation!