6 ms·

So, anyone has a list of the major changes coming in 2.0? Btw, slightly misleading title. It kind if implies that 2.0.0 is out.

by aoe 14y ago

JohnBooty 14y ago
According to Matz last year, "The version number goes up to 2.0 but the changes are rather small. Smaller than the ones we made in 1.9." http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-2-0-implementation-work-begins-what-is-ruby-2-0-and-whats-new-5515.html http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-2-0-implementation-work-begin... Here's a Quora thread with links to a presentation by Matz and a summary by Yehuda Katz: http://www.quora.com/Ruby-programming-language/What-are-the-major-changes-in-Ruby-2-0 http://www.quora.com/Ruby-programming-language/What-are-the-... "Language improvements: - Named arguments.. 1.step(by: 2, to: 10) { ... } - Selector namespaces (unclear to me whether this differs from refinements as described by Katz) - Multiple inheritance Interpreter Improvements: - Incremental performance improvements over 1.9's VM - Better compatibility with non-unix environments and small/constrained devices (embeddable) - Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread)" Matz's presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t9LMOydfc4k http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t... Yehuda's summary of "refinements": http://yehudakatz.com/2010/11/30/ruby-2-0-refinements-in-practice/ http://yehudakatz.com/2010/11/30/ruby-2-0-refinements-in-pra...
- mitchellh 14y ago
  > * Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread) This will not make it into Ruby 2.0.0: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003
- propercoil 14y ago
  Multiple inheritance is the major one for me.. been waiting a long time for this
  - nahname 14y ago
    What does multiple inheritance provide that isn't better achieved through composition/modules?
    - phillmv 14y ago
      Why is that even something worth working on? I find modules work pretty good.
    - account_taken 14y ago
      Agree with you. Didn't we learn from C++ that multiple inheritance is good in theory but in practice a horrible idea? Ruby already lets you be 'magical' in too many ways.
      - pjmlp 14y ago
        It is also available in Eiffel, OCaml and Python. So there are some good ways to make use of it. But I agree interfaces/traits is a better way of dealing with multiple inheritance scenario.
        draegtun 14y ago
        Perl (5 & 6) also has multiple inheritance. Current best practise in the Perl community is to avoid using MI and instead make use of roles. ref: https://metacpan.org/module/Moose::Role https://metacpan.org/module/Moose::Role | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6#Roles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6#Roles | http://modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/05/perl-roles-versus-inheritance.html http://modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/05/perl-roles-versus-inhe...
      - lloeki 14y ago
        > Didn't we learn from C++ that multiple inheritance is good in theory but in practice a horrible idea? No, we learned from C++ that C++ multiple inheritance is an atrocity. Python's MI works in a clear and obvious way, similar[0] to how the Ruby inheritance chain is clear and obvious. MI really doesn't fit Ruby though, and IMHO would look too bolted on. Most of the time the problem is people beating the platform they develop on into submission, instead of embracing it by getting a clear picture of what happens. [0] As _why said[1], python and ruby are damn close: you can easily get something similar to Ruby's modules and inject them dynamically in the inheritance chain: https://gist.github.com/3951273 https://gist.github.com/3951273 [1] https://github.com/whymirror/unholy https://github.com/whymirror/unholy
  - muirbot 14y ago
    I'm seeing contradictory information about this. Is multiple inheritance in or out?
- tenderlove 14y ago
  > Named arguments yes, though it's basically an optional argument hash. AFAIK, you can't do required named arguments without weird hacks, or specifically checking the arguments. For example: irb(main):007:0> def foo(bar: bar, baz: Object.new); [bar, baz]; end => nil irb(main):008:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fcaa40db4e0>] irb(main):009:0> foo(baz: 1) NameError: undefined local variable or method `bar' for main:Object from (irb):7:in `foo' from (irb):9 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):010:0> This hack makes the "bar" parameter required, but only because the value is evaluated when the method is called, and you get a NameError (rather than an ArgumentError). > Selector namepaces yes, but it's called refinements. You can see how they're used here: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/trunk/test/ruby/test_refinement.rb https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/trunk/test/ruby/test_refin... (sorry for the link to a test, I'm feeling lazy ;-) ) > Multiple inheritance Sorry, there won't be multiple inheritance. > Incremental performance improvements over 1.9's VM yes, ko1 has been working on removing / optimizing bytecodes in the VM. > Better compatibility with non-unix environments and small/constrained devices (embeddable) I don't know of any work on this other than mruby, which isn't MRI. > Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread) nope. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 Other stuff: * DTrace probes * Better within ruby tracing https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6895 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6895 I run edge ruby against rails daily. The main incompatibilities I've hit in Ruby 2.0 are what methods respond_to? searches (I've blogged about that here: http://tenderlovemaking.com/2012/09/07/protected-methods-and-ruby-2-0.html http://tenderlovemaking.com/2012/09/07/protected-methods-and... ), and the `Config` constant has been removed (which is sometimes an issue for C extensions). EDIT Just thought of this for the required args: irb(main):001:0> def foo(bar: (raise ArgumentError), foo: Object.new); [bar, foo]; end => nil irb(main):002:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fc65a882f48>] irb(main):003:0> foo(foo: 1) ArgumentError: ArgumentError from (irb):1:in `foo' from (irb):3 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):004:0> You could probably define a private method like `required` or some such, like this: irb(main):001:0> def required(name); raise ArgumentError, "missing param: %s" % name; end => nil irb(main):002:0> def foo(bar: required(:bar), foo: Object.new); [bar, foo]; end => nil irb(main):003:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fcfea143338>] irb(main):004:0> foo(foo: 1) ArgumentError: missing param: bar from (irb):1:in `required' from (irb):2:in `foo' from (irb):4 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):005:0>
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
kingfishr 14y ago
I believe this also includes the bitmap marking GC changes which will make the GC copy-on-write friendly. This is pretty important for a lot of folks running Ruby web servers. See, for example: http://patshaughnessy.net/2012/3/23/why-you-should-be-excited-about-garbage-collection-in-ruby-2-0 http://patshaughnessy.net/2012/3/23/why-you-should-be-excite...
- chao- 14y ago
  This is probably the most exciting part to me: Having copy-on-write without having to run REE.
  - xal 14y ago
    You can have this right now. We back ported the GC. Shopify in running on this ruby version in production. https://gist.github.com/1688857 https://gist.github.com/1688857
    - juzfoo 14y ago
      Thats great! Hope this will work on 1.9.3p286 as well?
      - nifoc 14y ago
        Yes, the Falcon patches work like a charm against p286.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tylersmith 14y ago
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/roadmap#2.0.0 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/roadmap#2.0.0

So, anyone has a list of the major changes coming in 2.0? Btw, slightly misleading title. It kind if implies that 2.0.0 is out.

by aoe 14y ago

So, anyone has a list of the major changes coming in 2.0? Btw, slightly misleading title. It kind if implies that 2.0.0 is out.

JohnBooty 14y ago

According to Matz last year, "The version number goes up to 2.0 but the changes are rather small. Smaller than the ones we made in 1.9." http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-2-0-implementation-work-begins-what-is-ruby-2-0-and-whats-new-5515.html http://www.rubyinside.com/ruby-2-0-implementation-work-begin... Here's a Quora thread with links to a presentation by Matz and a summary by Yehuda Katz: http://www.quora.com/Ruby-programming-language/What-are-the-major-changes-in-Ruby-2-0 http://www.quora.com/Ruby-programming-language/What-are-the-... "Language improvements: - Named arguments.. 1.step(by: 2, to: 10) { ... } - Selector namespaces (unclear to me whether this differs from refinements as described by Katz) - Multiple inheritance Interpreter Improvements: - Incremental performance improvements over 1.9's VM - Better compatibility with non-unix environments and small/constrained devices (embeddable) - Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread)" Matz's presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t9LMOydfc4k http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t... Yehuda's summary of "refinements": http://yehudakatz.com/2010/11/30/ruby-2-0-refinements-in-practice/ http://yehudakatz.com/2010/11/30/ruby-2-0-refinements-in-pra...

mitchellh 14y ago
> * Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread) This will not make it into Ruby 2.0.0: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003
propercoil 14y ago
Multiple inheritance is the major one for me.. been waiting a long time for this
- nahname 14y ago
  What does multiple inheritance provide that isn't better achieved through composition/modules?
  - phillmv 14y ago
    Why is that even something worth working on? I find modules work pretty good.
  - account_taken 14y ago
    Agree with you. Didn't we learn from C++ that multiple inheritance is good in theory but in practice a horrible idea? Ruby already lets you be 'magical' in too many ways.
    - pjmlp 14y ago
      It is also available in Eiffel, OCaml and Python. So there are some good ways to make use of it. But I agree interfaces/traits is a better way of dealing with multiple inheritance scenario.
      - draegtun 14y ago
        Perl (5 & 6) also has multiple inheritance. Current best practise in the Perl community is to avoid using MI and instead make use of roles. ref: https://metacpan.org/module/Moose::Role https://metacpan.org/module/Moose::Role | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6#Roles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl_6#Roles | http://modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/05/perl-roles-versus-inheritance.html http://modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/05/perl-roles-versus-inhe...
    - lloeki 14y ago
      > Didn't we learn from C++ that multiple inheritance is good in theory but in practice a horrible idea? No, we learned from C++ that C++ multiple inheritance is an atrocity. Python's MI works in a clear and obvious way, similar[0] to how the Ruby inheritance chain is clear and obvious. MI really doesn't fit Ruby though, and IMHO would look too bolted on. Most of the time the problem is people beating the platform they develop on into submission, instead of embracing it by getting a clear picture of what happens. [0] As _why said[1], python and ruby are damn close: you can easily get something similar to Ruby's modules and inject them dynamically in the inheritance chain: https://gist.github.com/3951273 https://gist.github.com/3951273 [1] https://github.com/whymirror/unholy https://github.com/whymirror/unholy
- muirbot 14y ago
  I'm seeing contradictory information about this. Is multiple inheritance in or out?
tenderlove 14y ago
> Named arguments yes, though it's basically an optional argument hash. AFAIK, you can't do required named arguments without weird hacks, or specifically checking the arguments. For example: irb(main):007:0> def foo(bar: bar, baz: Object.new); [bar, baz]; end => nil irb(main):008:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fcaa40db4e0>] irb(main):009:0> foo(baz: 1) NameError: undefined local variable or method `bar' for main:Object from (irb):7:in `foo' from (irb):9 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):010:0> This hack makes the "bar" parameter required, but only because the value is evaluated when the method is called, and you get a NameError (rather than an ArgumentError). > Selector namepaces yes, but it's called refinements. You can see how they're used here: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/trunk/test/ruby/test_refinement.rb https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/trunk/test/ruby/test_refin... (sorry for the link to a test, I'm feeling lazy ;-) ) > Multiple inheritance Sorry, there won't be multiple inheritance. > Incremental performance improvements over 1.9's VM yes, ko1 has been working on removing / optimizing bytecodes in the VM. > Better compatibility with non-unix environments and small/constrained devices (embeddable) I don't know of any work on this other than mruby, which isn't MRI. > Sandboxed VM's (VM per thread) nope. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7003 Other stuff: * DTrace probes * Better within ruby tracing https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6895 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6895 I run edge ruby against rails daily. The main incompatibilities I've hit in Ruby 2.0 are what methods respond_to? searches (I've blogged about that here: http://tenderlovemaking.com/2012/09/07/protected-methods-and-ruby-2-0.html http://tenderlovemaking.com/2012/09/07/protected-methods-and... ), and the `Config` constant has been removed (which is sometimes an issue for C extensions). EDIT Just thought of this for the required args: irb(main):001:0> def foo(bar: (raise ArgumentError), foo: Object.new); [bar, foo]; end => nil irb(main):002:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fc65a882f48>] irb(main):003:0> foo(foo: 1) ArgumentError: ArgumentError from (irb):1:in `foo' from (irb):3 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):004:0> You could probably define a private method like `required` or some such, like this: irb(main):001:0> def required(name); raise ArgumentError, "missing param: %s" % name; end => nil irb(main):002:0> def foo(bar: required(:bar), foo: Object.new); [bar, foo]; end => nil irb(main):003:0> foo(bar: 1) => [1, #<Object:0x007fcfea143338>] irb(main):004:0> foo(foo: 1) ArgumentError: missing param: bar from (irb):1:in `required' from (irb):2:in `foo' from (irb):4 from /Users/aaron/.local/bin/irb:12:in `<main>' irb(main):005:0>

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

kingfishr 14y ago

I believe this also includes the bitmap marking GC changes which will make the GC copy-on-write friendly. This is pretty important for a lot of folks running Ruby web servers. See, for example: http://patshaughnessy.net/2012/3/23/why-you-should-be-excited-about-garbage-collection-in-ruby-2-0 http://patshaughnessy.net/2012/3/23/why-you-should-be-excite...

chao- 14y ago
This is probably the most exciting part to me: Having copy-on-write without having to run REE.
- xal 14y ago
  You can have this right now. We back ported the GC. Shopify in running on this ruby version in production. https://gist.github.com/1688857 https://gist.github.com/1688857
  - juzfoo 14y ago
    Thats great! Hope this will work on 1.9.3p286 as well?
    - nifoc 14y ago
      Yes, the Falcon patches work like a charm against p286.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

tylersmith 14y ago

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/roadmap#2.0.0 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/roadmap#2.0.0