M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Alex Young wrote:
>> Has anyone got an overview of the current status of the various Ruby
>> spec suites?  I know of at least 3 (rubicon, jRuby's tests, and
>> rubinius' specs), but I've got no idea how complete or active they are,
>> or which Ruby version they're attempting to track.  A wild guess says
>> that jRuby's has probably got the best coverage, but is there anyone
>> actually knee-deep in them that can give me a better idea?
>>
>> Thanks,
> There is a gem, the Big "Formal" Test Suite (bfts) that is supposed to
> be the most complete. It's the successor to Rubicon. As I recall, there
> are two "Ruby standards" -- MRI (Matz' Reference Implementation), which
> is Ruby 1.8.x and which jRuby, MRI itself, IronRuby, and probably most
> other implementations are attempting to track -- and KRI (Koichi's
> Reference Implementation), which is Ruby 1.9.x -- Ruby 2.
> 
> Pat Eyler is the person who most closely tracks the various
> implementations of Ruby, so he'd be the logical one to go into more detail.
> 
Fab.  Thanks, guys.

-- 
Alex