On Sep 13, 2006, at 9:53 AM, Richard Conroy wrote:

> On 9/13/06, James Edward Gray II <james / grayproductions.net> wrote:
>> On Sep 13, 2006, at 8:14 AM, Richard Conroy wrote:
>>
>> > Currently there is nothing on the Ruby radar for that. I mean Ruby
>> > 2.0 is in early discussion phase...
>>
>> $ ruby_yarv -ve 'puts "In the early discussion phase!"'ruby 2.0.0
>> (Base: Ruby 1.9.0 2006-04-08) [i686-darwin8.7.1]
>> YARVCore 0.4.1 Rev: 527 (2006-07-19) [opts: [direct threaded code]
>> [inline method cache] ]
>> In the early discussion phase!
>>
>> James Edward Gray II

You are changing your story below.  I will try to address your  
points, but you originally said Ruby 2.0 is in the early discussion  
phase.  I showed you a running interpreter.  To me, those are opposites.

Ruby 2.0 has been in development for for years, literally.  We now  
have a functional VM.  My opinion is that it is in late development.

> What are their release dates?

I believe the current plan is to release Ruby 1.9 on Christmas,  
2007.  It's a little over a year out.  If you look back at how many  
years it has been planned/developed, that furthers my claim of late  
development.

This jump to 1.9 is basically an attempt to get an improved Ruby in  
your hands as fast as possible.  Everything for 2.0 isn't ready yet,  
but important people know so things need fixing sooner and we have  
some solutions now.  See how well your needs are being considered?

In your earlier post, you criticized Ruby because other languages are  
evolving to get faster and Ruby is not.  That upset me because you  
casually diminished the hard work of everyone who has gone to great  
lengths to make Ruby faster for years now.  They are nearing the end  
of their journey and you are calling for them to get started.  I feel  
that shows a huge disrespect for their efforts.

> Have all of the library/ plugin and existing code problems been  
> addressed?

If all the problems had been solved, the release date would be today.

> How Rails compatible are they?

I know there have been recent efforts in this direction.  I believe  
some progress is being made here.

> Has the rush to be version compatible with various
> libraries introduced any exploits?

Ruby 1.9 and up will introduce some incompatibilities.  The goal is  
to correct some mistakes in the language all at once, so users only  
need to go through one big transition.

I'm sure language exploits are being addressed as a natural part of  
the development process.

> Can I patch my customers installations right now?

Ruby 1.9 is a development branch.  Patch at your risk, obviously.

> Basically "How soon can I hot swap my interpreter in my rails
> app with No ill effects".
>
> I am talking about how long it takes to:
> - produce a X.0.0 revision
> - produce a version with all the library issues worked out by the  
> community
> (either a X.0.(1..n), or more correctly, rev all the main libraries)
> - build confidence in a particular version
>
> These processes take time. Less than 12 months seems woefully
> optimistic. 18-24 months maybe? Longer?

It has taken much longer in fact.  The point is that is is  
happening.  Some people are working very, very hard to improve Ruby  
in many areas and making great progress.  Others are writing emails  
about how nice it would be if people tried to improve Ruby.

James Edward Gray II