Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Work has started on Ruby 2.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 62 posts

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#11

Post by grifaton »

lloeki wrote: post #8
pdelgallego wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For good or bad, the ruby community tends to embrace changes faster than the Python community. For example Rails is going to drop 1.8.7 support in the next release 3.2

From personal experience the community at large is eager to move to Python 3. It has more to do with tremendous inertia generated by critical components being tricky to port to Python 3. Usual suspects Django and Twisted come to mind. IIRC NumPy gained support only recently. The Wall of Shame gives a very partial overview of the situation: http://python3wos.appspot.com/ It does not help that useful stuff from 3.x get…

Just minutes ago, this was announced on the Twisted mailing list:

https://bitbucket.org/pitrou/t3k/wiki/Home

It's described as "an experimental, work-in-progress port of Twisted to Python 3".

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#12

Post by petercooper »

mjbellantoni wrote: post #6
pdelgallego wrote: post #5

If you are interested about what directions ruby will take in the future you can read this thread in the ruby core mailing list. http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/...

I wish overall performance was on that list!

Recent (and ongoing) garbage collection changes are effecting that. And bytecode export/import will remove the parsing element on startup, at least.

Nonetheless, Ruby compares favorably against stock PHP, Python and Perl nowadays. It's only one benchmark and it's possible to make any look faster than the other, but Ruby is no longer miles behind everyone else: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/which-programming-lang...

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#13

Post by Argorak »

plq wrote: post #4

That sounds nice but, what's the plan? The closest I could find was this: http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-20/roadmap

The plan is that the next major release is 2.0.0 and not 1.9.4, which means that they can start talking about the Roadmap in the correct context. Don't expect 2.0 to be released next year.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#14

Post by Argorak »

compay wrote: post #9

A lot of folks in the Ruby community were hopeful that Rubinius would replace MRI to become Ruby 2.0. Looks like that's going to have to wait a little longer now.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch.

On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#15

Post by gnufied »

Argorak wrote: post #14
compay wrote: post #9

A lot of folks in the Ruby community were hopeful that Rubinius would replace MRI to become Ruby 2.0. Looks like that's going to have to wait a little longer now.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

For a lot of folks, rubinius has already replaced MRI. At least locally while developing. I am not sure, why you are saying "It will never happen".

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#16

Post by Argorak »

gnufied wrote: post #15
Argorak wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

For a lot of folks, rubinius has already replaced MRI. At least locally while developing. I am not sure, why you are saying "It will never happen".

Thats the user perspective.

I don't see the MRI team, which has built a whole tool-chain around developing MRI throwing away all that and to switch to a new platform.

I like Rubinius very much, as I do with JRuby, I just don't see Rubinius replacing MRI. Thats what I meant by 'dreaming'. A non-realistic expectation that is not backed by any real events.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#17

Post by rue »

Argorak wrote: post #14
compay wrote: post #9

A lot of folks in the Ruby community were hopeful that Rubinius would replace MRI to become Ruby 2.0. Looks like that's going to have to wait a little longer now.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

> Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch.

The only serious piece missing from 1.9 is the encoding support. There's a number of other relatively minor failures remaining, but those are simple enough to fix (and several people, contributors new and old, are doing so at this very moment).

And the switch is -X19.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#18

Post by compay »

Argorak wrote: post #14
compay wrote: post #9

A lot of folks in the Ruby community were hopeful that Rubinius would replace MRI to become Ruby 2.0. Looks like that's going to have to wait a little longer now.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

It's not like MRI 2.0 is right around the corner either. A lot of work will be needed to get 2.0 out the door - potentially years. That work could instead be applied to Rubinius, and the release schedule could end up being similar.

If it's "just a dream," it's largely for human reasons rather than technical ones.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#19

Post by TylerE »

lloeki wrote: post #8
pdelgallego wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For good or bad, the ruby community tends to embrace changes faster than the Python community. For example Rails is going to drop 1.8.7 support in the next release 3.2

From personal experience the community at large is eager to move to Python 3. It has more to do with tremendous inertia generated by critical components being tricky to port to Python 3. Usual suspects Django and Twisted come to mind. IIRC NumPy gained support only recently. The Wall of Shame gives a very partial overview of the situation: http://python3wos.appspot.com/ It does not help that useful stuff from 3.x get…

Really? It seems to me like a mostly small vocal group is pushing 3. Most people I talk to actually using it heavily in production are ambivalent or actively planning on staying on 2.

Python 3 is exactly how not to do a major language change. They broke enough that porting isn't trivial, and for many programs there just isn't any benefit. Plus the performance noticeably regressed.

Re: Work has started on Ruby 2.0

#20

Post by Argorak »

rue wrote: post #17
Argorak wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will most likely never happen. Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. On a side-note, a lot of folks are also dreamers.

> Also, Rubinius still has to fully implement Ruby 1.9, so its not like you could just flip a switch. The only serious piece missing from 1.9 is the encoding support. There's a number of other relatively minor failures remaining, but those are simple enough to fix (and several people, contributors new and old, are doing so at this very moment). And the switch is -X19.

I know that they are on a good track towards 1.9 support. My point still stands: they are not there yet. So, if you were an MRI developer: would you switch to an interpreter where would have to build that whole stuff from the last 3 years again?
Post reply on HN