-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Sep 17, 2006, at 5:43 AM, Joan Iglesias wrote:

>
> In a company that you have to make money by your time, this is not a
> good philosophy. Of course I understand that the improvements in the
> syntax and all this is good..., I cannot modify my programs so many
> times with the risk of making mistakes because of the language...

Ahem, there's a lot of us that make money by our time...  as a self  
employed contractor, it's all I have.  As such I'd rather use Ruby -  
I can get more programming done in a given amount of time, which  
makes the customer happy and yields repeat business.

The changes are rarely big enough cause major problems;  It's not  
like the language suddenly looks like a brand new language;  they are  
not going to introduce python's whitespace rules or anything.

When a new release comes out, you just read through the changelog  
(someone will make a list of incompatibilities, I'm sure) and then  
use your tools... search, source code management.

Run a test system with your unit tests. (You do have a formal testing  
procedure, right?)

Perl has had its own share of backwards compatibility issues.  I  
think it sounds like you are trying to find an excuse to block ruby  
in your organization.

These same methods should have been employed by everyone who got  
burned by the 1.1 release of rails.  It's not that the changes were  
all that big, but some simple testing would have eased the transition.


David Morton
Maia Mailguard http://www.maiamailguard.com
mortonda / dgrmm.net



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFFDWZTUy30ODPkzl0RAv+eAJ9bqGiuHs0Z06ur+1g2yFoVG66MKgCgn7+I
84bngsszv/cWzPATE5q27eA=
=oW2r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----