Hi --

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Brian Mitchell wrote:

> What do you guys think? Should we embrace a spec driven system or just
> continue to use ruby as the reference implementation? Should we
> continue our current ways but have a spec as further documentation?

My memory is that Matz said, at one or more of the RubyConfs, that he
himself did not intend to devote the time to writing a formal language
spec for Ruby but had no objection in principle if people wanted to.
I'm not sure whether he indicated he might grant it official status.

As others have said, I think the test suite is a key measure of what
something that claims to interpret Ruby should do.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack / wobblini.net