4 ms·

Quite on the contrary. 1.9-compat was very quickly expected of all libs and all important core libs run better on >1.9. 1.9 was the cleanup release after the l

• dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Quite on the contrary. 1.9-compat was very quickly expected of all libs and all important core libs run better on >1.9. That's quite some historical revisionism -- there was quite a while when quite a lot of libraries weren't running on 1.9. It wasn't as bad as with Python, probably because Ruby wasn't popular for as long as Python was, so there weren't as many big libraries that were hard to update. But it was a huge deal. > 1.9 was the cleanup release after the language became popular and very necessary. It was necessary for much the same kind of reasons (and, sometimes, the exact same specific reasons) as Python 3 -- particularly, the string encoding problem.
  • Argorak 12y ago
    > That's quite some historical revisionism I concur. The _expectancy_ that libraries should be updated was there pretty quickly. New libraries were generally created with both versions in mind. It was a huge porting effort, especially with 1.9.0 being very buggy, but there was a general sense in the community that you need to port or die.
• blablabla123 12y ago
  At least the whole Google Appengine Ruby suite never worked on 1.9. Also JRuby took some time to be 100% 1.9 compatible.