hehehe! I actually meant how the code can progresses and improves as you move along the line :)
2.0 (not great) --> 3.0 (better) --> Ruby (Much better!) Make sense? On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Mike Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Curt Hagenlocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> > I agree, Anders doesn't allow the argument to be so convincing. >> > However, I generally go 2.0 > 3.0 > Ruby - Ruby still better.... :) >> >> Sorry about the pendantry, but I think you wanted that to say >> "2.0 < 3.0 < Ruby" > > I hope that was what he was trying to say. Otherwise, he could be the IT > Director at my old job. > >> >> :) >> >> -Curt >> _______________________________________________ >> Ironruby-core mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > [email protected] > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > > _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
