3 ms·
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 a
by Argorak 15y ago
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?
- regularfry 15y agoI can imagine a world where Rubinius never gets 1.9 encoding support, and declares it a non-goal. It's not that outlandish.
- Xylakant 15y agoWhich is something that I'd regard as a major setback. Here in Europe, a solid encoding support is pretty much a must-have for any up-to-date programming language. There's much more than utf-8 and not being able to handle that is a deal-breaker for me.
- evanphx 15y agoIt's being worked on right now and the infrastructure for it already in place. It's a goal.
- msbarnett 15y agoLeaving aside the fact that encoding support is explicitly a goal, it would be an incredibly daft thing to do to decide that Rubinius was going to take a regressive, all-the-world-is-one-encoding point of view and break compatibility with much existing Ruby code.