On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> Real breaking
> changes of documented behaviour like the Bignum/Fixnum one are rare, and
> the effects are moderate.
This isn't even "breaking" yet. Only deprecated.
--
konsolebox
Sorry, I missed your reply.
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> Am 04. September 2017 um 12:07 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
>> Even if they can not present an argument like I have,
>> they will probably only notice it if it misbehaves
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 09/04/2017 01:07 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>> For almost all languages but Ruby (and Perl) you can take code written
>> against one minor version and compile it in the next minor version.
>
>
> This isn't a language issue
Am 04. September 2017 um 12:07 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
> Even if they can not present an argument like I have,
> they will probably only notice it if it misbehaves in some way. If it
> misbehaves more than other software on their system, who is to say it
> isn't a poorly
On 09/04/2017 01:07 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>
> For almost all languages but Ruby (and Perl) you can take code written
> against one minor version and compile it in the next minor version.
This isn't a language issue with Ruby, it's a culture/package-management
one. For a long time, it's been easy to
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 1:49 AM, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> Am 03. September 2017 um 15:35 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
>> I think the takeaway from Alan's comment is that Python is unnaturally
>> stable compared to other interpreted languages. One might be
Am 03. September 2017 um 15:35 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
> I think the takeaway from Alan's comment is that Python is unnaturally
> stable compared to other interpreted languages. One might be inclined
> to think Python developers consider their work to be a widely used
> tool
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> The situation with ruby really isn't different from python or perl at
> all. We also have multiple python versions in the tree just like with
> ruby. perl is not slotted but faces the same issues on each version (e.g.
>
Am 02. September 2017 um 21:18 Uhr -0500 schrieb R0b0t1 :
> Seeing as the OP is saying there are 3 versions queued for merge and
> he has not installed any of them by hand it looks like Alan is
> right. Perhaps the OP is using "old" Ruby based software, but software
> of that age
On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Marvin Gülker wrote:
> Am 02. September 2017 um 22:57 Uhr +0200 schrieb Alan McKinnon
> :
>> OK, so disclaimer up front. I detest Ruby. I hate it with a passion.
>
> There is nothing one can do against that,
Am 02. September 2017 um 22:57 Uhr +0200 schrieb Alan McKinnon
:
> OK, so disclaimer up front. I detest Ruby. I hate it with a passion.
There is nothing one can do against that, but...
> Each new minor version of ruby is a whole new language and the devs
> are OK with
On 02/09/2017 15:33, Andrew Lowe wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm in the process of doing a world update and due to a failed compile,
> I have cause to look up through the list of stuff to compile/update.
> Imagine my surprise when I saw there were three versions of Ruby wanting
> to update:
>
>
On Saturday, 2 September 2017 14:33:31 BST Andrew Lowe wrote:
> I'm in the process of doing a world update and due to a failed compile,
> I have cause to look up through the list of stuff to compile/update.
> Imagine my surprise when I saw there were three versions of Ruby wanting
> to update:
>
13 matches
Mail list logo