From: "GJB" <gjblomquist / hotmail.com>
>
>I was wondering why noone responded (besides the fact that I mistakenly
> asked about the quality of the Ruby VM when its actually an
> interpreter)?   I considered the question an earnest one and did not
> intend to be trolling.

Not sure what particular measure of quality you were asking
about - but for what it's worth, I run some multi-user quake
server admin software written in Ruby that consistently operates
for hundreds of days of uptime, until I eventually reboot the
server or quit the application intentionally.

It uses TCP and UDP networking, and keeps a fairly large dynamic
in-memory data structure (100 megs or so)... I also dynamically
reload code modules without quitting the application on a periodic
basis, when adding simple new features or making bug fixes.

I've been pleased with Ruby's stability so far, if that helps.


Regards,

Bill