2009/2/12 Gregory Brown <gregory.t.brown / gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Pit Capitain <pit.capitain / gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gregory, there is no Ruby 1.8 and has never been. There have been
>> 1.8.0, 1.8.1, up to 1.8.7, each one differing from the others.
>
> You keep saying this but frankly, it's ridiculous.  Yes, you can find
> changes.  In Ruby 1.8.7, you get clubbed over the head with them.

So we agree to disagree. Though I'd be interested in what you'd define
as "Ruby 1.8". Is it 1.8.6? Why not 1.8.2? Does 1.8.5 qualify as being
a "Ruby 1.8", despite the differences to 1.8.6? In the end I'm sure it
will be 1.8.6, so why not name it as such? Why interpret more into it
as it really is?

> We're not in disagreement here.  It's just been my experience that I
> can write code on 1.8.6 without thinking about back-wards
> compatibility with earlier versions, for the most part.  We all know
> that things have changed, but not in so radical a fashion.

Hmm, let's see how radical a change 1.8.7 has been until now:
Hash#hash has been changed (or should I say: fixed), it's not allowed
to allocate new objects during garbage collection anymore (the SWIG
problem), plus (admittedly a large number of) new features have been
added. I wouldn't call this radical, but, again, we just disagree
here, so I'll shut up now.

Regards,
Pit