On 3/21/06, gwtmp01 / mac.com <gwtmp01 / mac.com> wrote:
> I was just reading through http://scottraymond.net/articles/
> 2006/02/28/rails-1.1, which gives an overview of the next Rails release.
>
> I noticed a number of extensions to the core ruby classes:
>
>         Object#to_json
>         Enumerable#group_by
>         Array#in_groups_of
>         Hash#to_xml
>         Array#to_xml
>         Object#extended_by
>
> and so on.  Earlier versions of Rails also have lots of extensions to
> the core libraries.
>
> Is anyone else concerned that the rapid evolution and adoption of
> Rails is de facto
> forking the core and standard libraries of Ruby?

I am not concerned. This is why the language is open.

I am perplexed by the notion some seem to have that the open nature of
Ruby is really just something like a trophy wife that you don't
actually love, but love the idea of.

> I don't like the idea of having to know if I'm looking at Ruby on
> Rails or Ruby Classic.

I don't either. I think a healthy dose of familiarity with both should
foil that potential "crisis."

--
Seth Thomas Rasmussen
http://sethrasmussen.com/