18 ms·

If you're entirely new to the ecosystem, I would not be running Ruby 1.9.x or Rails 3. It may seem counter-productive to learn 'legacy' software, but these ver

by rbxbx 16y ago

If you're entirely new to the ecosystem, I would not be running Ruby 1.9.x or Rails 3. It may seem counter-productive to learn 'legacy' software, but these version will be around for a while I'm sure, you'll not hit nearly the snags you currently are, and you won't have /that/ much to learn when the later version are ready for you (and you them). also, ruby != rails ;)

derefr 16y ago
If you're quite familiar with Ruby/Rails, but you left the ecosystem for a while (before 1.9 existed), would it be better to re-acquaint yourself with 1.8/Rails 2 first, or just dive into the new stuff?
- rbxbx 16y ago
  I think it's fine to go to Rails 3 at this point, so long as you're aware of the potential pain points (and as a older seasoned Rails dev, I'm sure you are). I would still probably shy away from Ruby 1.9.x unless you knew that all the tooling/libraries you would need were supported, or wanted to go through the upgrade process on other people's libraries/write your own. That said, if you're willing to do that, Ruby 1.9 is quite nice and a bit more performant as well.
- Pistos2 16y ago
  [Setting Rails aside, ]the Ruby community needs help to move forward into the world of 1.9. 1.9 has many improvements that most people would benefit from, but many folks are either afraid to get their feet wet with 1.9, or have to support legacy applications. If anyone would be writing anything new in Ruby, I encourage them to write it for 1.9 and to leave 1.8 behind. For the past year or so, only about 5% of my stuff has been written to support 1.8. The rest has been written for 1.9, usually with syntax or feature usage that will not work under 1.8. When developing new Ruby stuff, one thing to watch for is interoperability with old gems that are not 1.9-ready. But the good news is, most gems work just fine under 1.9 -- at least in the non-Rails world. I think I recall only one or two gems I tried to use that weren't updated to work with 1.9 yet, out of many that I use or discovered.

by rbxbx 16y ago

derefr 16y ago

If you're quite familiar with Ruby/Rails, but you left the ecosystem for a while (before 1.9 existed), would it be better to re-acquaint yourself with 1.8/Rails 2 first, or just dive into the new stuff?

rbxbx 16y ago
I think it's fine to go to Rails 3 at this point, so long as you're aware of the potential pain points (and as a older seasoned Rails dev, I'm sure you are). I would still probably shy away from Ruby 1.9.x unless you knew that all the tooling/libraries you would need were supported, or wanted to go through the upgrade process on other people's libraries/write your own. That said, if you're willing to do that, Ruby 1.9 is quite nice and a bit more performant as well.
Pistos2 16y ago
[Setting Rails aside, ]the Ruby community needs help to move forward into the world of 1.9. 1.9 has many improvements that most people would benefit from, but many folks are either afraid to get their feet wet with 1.9, or have to support legacy applications. If anyone would be writing anything new in Ruby, I encourage them to write it for 1.9 and to leave 1.8 behind. For the past year or so, only about 5% of my stuff has been written to support 1.8. The rest has been written for 1.9, usually with syntax or feature usage that will not work under 1.8. When developing new Ruby stuff, one thing to watch for is interoperability with old gems that are not 1.9-ready. But the good news is, most gems work just fine under 1.9 -- at least in the non-Rails world. I think I recall only one or two gems I tried to use that weren't updated to work with 1.9 yet, out of many that I use or discovered.