6 ms·

Ruby 2.2.0-preview1 Released

163 points by petercooper 12y ago

ksec 12y ago
Now benchmarks Benchmarks...
stanislavb 12y ago
Waiting for Christmas...
atmosx 12y ago
> Because if this Rails 5.0 will be released for Ruby [...] I guess there's a typo: s/if/of
riffraff 12y ago
My fav feature: * min, min_by, max and max_by supports optional argument to return multiple elements. Assuming this does The Right Thing (i.e. uses fixed space) I always wanted it.
- repsilat 12y ago
  > uses fixed space I guess the "normal" way to write this is with a heap? For `min`, I guess the algorithm is something like, min(items, k=1): h = max_heap(items[:k]) for i in items[k:]: h.push(i) h.pop_max() return sorted(h) It isn't asymptotically slower than the normal algorithm for k=1, it doesn't need to make multiple passes over the data, and it doesn't mutate the original data structure, so it's a pretty sensible and natural extension to put in.
  - riffraff 12y ago
    yes, it's not hard (although I seem to recall mysql only implemented "limit" like this in v5.6), it's just that if it's not readily available people (well, me) tend to fall back to sort+first(n), which can be quite wasteful.
tbrock 12y ago
Ruby is still my favorite programming language to use for a project. It doesn't have the immediate approachability of python but if you put in the effort to understand and accept it's quirkiness you fall in love. I hope it continues to move forward as far as performance goes so people will continue to use it, not just mostly for prototypes, but beyond. Ruby 2.2 is a great step.
- thibaut_barrere 12y ago
  I started using Ruby 10 years ago and I'm surprised by its longevity as my main language. It's quite far from falling down gradually. I'm glad I picked it for my most important projects: it really feels as a solid base to build upon.
- yxhuvud 12y ago
  What quirkiness are you referring to? I tend to find python more quirky but then I've got a lot more experience with Ruby.
  - muchabi 12y ago
    Also curious here. I too find Ruby more consistent/predictable than Python. Ruby is my main/favorite language, but I was exposed to Python first and used it a lot more for work/school, so it's not an experience thing here.
- Slackwise 12y ago
  > understand and accept it's quirkiness Ruby is the child of Smalltalk and Perl/shell. If you know said languages, then you can figure out Ruby much easier.
ramigb 12y ago
It's a "weird feeling" to see a framework mentioned in a language update! it shows you that like Python has "one obvious way to do things" Ruby has one obvious framework, i can't see PHP 6.0 released and codeigniter/cake/any other framework mentioned in the release, correct me i'm wrong!.
- why-el 12y ago
  It really isn't. They mentioned Rails because it will be the biggest winner from their new GC that also collects symbols (Rails is a heavy user of symbols). No harm in mentioning some of the beneficiaries of the change, as long as that change is not unfairly impacting other projects. Good move from Matz and co.
  - ramigb 12y ago
    Never said it's a bad move, i love Rails and i love Ruby as well, it was just the first time i see a framework directly mentioned in a language changelog.
    - rubiquity 12y ago
      ruby-core has a history of making sure Rails does not guide the direction of Ruby the language. Most of the time, advancements to Ruby the language will always have a positive impact on Rails the framework. Sometimes these changes to Ruby the language come to light because of Rails the framework. It's a very healthy relationships between the two.
why-el 12y ago
Very impressive results with the new GC for symbols. Of 100,000 created, a `GC.start` got them down to about 2000.
stevekl 12y ago
I always have a mixed feeling about ruby. The "magic-ism" of ruby is something that I just cannot deal with. "require" gives you methods that appear out of nowhere (unlike other language where they are name spaced), method call without perens (so what is an attribute, what is a method call) All of these look nice at first but kills maintainability later
- rubiquity 12y ago
  > method call without perens (so what is an attribute, what is a method call) That's known as Uniform Access Principle[0] and is a wonderful feature to have. Ruby is far less magical today than it was 5-10 years ago. Magic is a clever word for "I don't understand this thing yet." 0 - http://martinfowler.com/bliki/UniformAccessPrinciple.html http://martinfowler.com/bliki/UniformAccessPrinciple.html
  - innguest 12y ago
    Disregarding the UAP thing you mentioned, I believe you might be dismissing the complaints of "magic" in Ruby too quickly if you think all it is meant by it is what you said. In the contexts I usually see, the complaints of magic are regarding Ruby's fondness of Spooky Action at a Distance. I would then argue that Ruby or its frameworks do seem to rely too much on this "magic" that otherwise is condemned by recent literature (and Code Complete).
    - dasil003 12y ago
      I think the discussion is really about Rails, not Ruby. Ruby itself is fairly minimalist and easy to follow. Probably the biggest legitimate complaint about the language design itself is that it mixes functional, procedural, and object-oriented paradigms in a way that makes it hard to fully capture the benefits of any of them unless you really know what you're doing. Now Rails on the other hand relies on a good deal more magic than say Django, but it's recognized in the community as a tradeoff and it is done carefully. Some of the things that rubyists accept in Rails they would never put in an application or library because it is deemed okay only by massively adopted convention at the framework level, but not generally a good practice. Then you have libraries like rspec which started out being full of magic but which gradually got refined and cleaned up so that in rspec 3.0 you have zero monkey patches; it's just pure ruby, providing a totally modular set of DSLs that work together nicely and allow for amazingly readable test output.
dakull 12y ago
This looks awesome so far - kudos to the team. I also started benchmarking it just for fun[0] [0] - http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-quick-rails-benchmarks http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-qui...
dakull 12y ago
This looks awesome so far - kudos to the team. I also started benchmarking it just for fun[0] [0] - http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-quick-rails-benchmarks http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-qui...

163 points by petercooper 12y ago

ksec 12y ago

Now benchmarks Benchmarks...

stanislavb 12y ago

Waiting for Christmas...

atmosx 12y ago

> Because if this Rails 5.0 will be released for Ruby [...] I guess there's a typo: s/if/of

riffraff 12y ago

My fav feature: * min, min_by, max and max_by supports optional argument to return multiple elements. Assuming this does The Right Thing (i.e. uses fixed space) I always wanted it.

repsilat 12y ago
> uses fixed space I guess the "normal" way to write this is with a heap? For `min`, I guess the algorithm is something like, min(items, k=1): h = max_heap(items[:k]) for i in items[k:]: h.push(i) h.pop_max() return sorted(h) It isn't asymptotically slower than the normal algorithm for k=1, it doesn't need to make multiple passes over the data, and it doesn't mutate the original data structure, so it's a pretty sensible and natural extension to put in.
- riffraff 12y ago
  yes, it's not hard (although I seem to recall mysql only implemented "limit" like this in v5.6), it's just that if it's not readily available people (well, me) tend to fall back to sort+first(n), which can be quite wasteful.

tbrock 12y ago

Ruby is still my favorite programming language to use for a project. It doesn't have the immediate approachability of python but if you put in the effort to understand and accept it's quirkiness you fall in love. I hope it continues to move forward as far as performance goes so people will continue to use it, not just mostly for prototypes, but beyond. Ruby 2.2 is a great step.

thibaut_barrere 12y ago
I started using Ruby 10 years ago and I'm surprised by its longevity as my main language. It's quite far from falling down gradually. I'm glad I picked it for my most important projects: it really feels as a solid base to build upon.
yxhuvud 12y ago
What quirkiness are you referring to? I tend to find python more quirky but then I've got a lot more experience with Ruby.
- muchabi 12y ago
  Also curious here. I too find Ruby more consistent/predictable than Python. Ruby is my main/favorite language, but I was exposed to Python first and used it a lot more for work/school, so it's not an experience thing here.
Slackwise 12y ago
> understand and accept it's quirkiness Ruby is the child of Smalltalk and Perl/shell. If you know said languages, then you can figure out Ruby much easier.

ramigb 12y ago

It's a "weird feeling" to see a framework mentioned in a language update! it shows you that like Python has "one obvious way to do things" Ruby has one obvious framework, i can't see PHP 6.0 released and codeigniter/cake/any other framework mentioned in the release, correct me i'm wrong!.

why-el 12y ago
It really isn't. They mentioned Rails because it will be the biggest winner from their new GC that also collects symbols (Rails is a heavy user of symbols). No harm in mentioning some of the beneficiaries of the change, as long as that change is not unfairly impacting other projects. Good move from Matz and co.
- ramigb 12y ago
  Never said it's a bad move, i love Rails and i love Ruby as well, it was just the first time i see a framework directly mentioned in a language changelog.
  - rubiquity 12y ago
    ruby-core has a history of making sure Rails does not guide the direction of Ruby the language. Most of the time, advancements to Ruby the language will always have a positive impact on Rails the framework. Sometimes these changes to Ruby the language come to light because of Rails the framework. It's a very healthy relationships between the two.

why-el 12y ago

Very impressive results with the new GC for symbols. Of 100,000 created, a `GC.start` got them down to about 2000.

stevekl 12y ago

I always have a mixed feeling about ruby. The "magic-ism" of ruby is something that I just cannot deal with. "require" gives you methods that appear out of nowhere (unlike other language where they are name spaced), method call without perens (so what is an attribute, what is a method call) All of these look nice at first but kills maintainability later

rubiquity 12y ago
> method call without perens (so what is an attribute, what is a method call) That's known as Uniform Access Principle[0] and is a wonderful feature to have. Ruby is far less magical today than it was 5-10 years ago. Magic is a clever word for "I don't understand this thing yet." 0 - http://martinfowler.com/bliki/UniformAccessPrinciple.html http://martinfowler.com/bliki/UniformAccessPrinciple.html
- innguest 12y ago
  Disregarding the UAP thing you mentioned, I believe you might be dismissing the complaints of "magic" in Ruby too quickly if you think all it is meant by it is what you said. In the contexts I usually see, the complaints of magic are regarding Ruby's fondness of Spooky Action at a Distance. I would then argue that Ruby or its frameworks do seem to rely too much on this "magic" that otherwise is condemned by recent literature (and Code Complete).
  - dasil003 12y ago
    I think the discussion is really about Rails, not Ruby. Ruby itself is fairly minimalist and easy to follow. Probably the biggest legitimate complaint about the language design itself is that it mixes functional, procedural, and object-oriented paradigms in a way that makes it hard to fully capture the benefits of any of them unless you really know what you're doing. Now Rails on the other hand relies on a good deal more magic than say Django, but it's recognized in the community as a tradeoff and it is done carefully. Some of the things that rubyists accept in Rails they would never put in an application or library because it is deemed okay only by massively adopted convention at the framework level, but not generally a good practice. Then you have libraries like rspec which started out being full of magic but which gradually got refined and cleaned up so that in rspec 3.0 you have zero monkey patches; it's just pure ruby, providing a totally modular set of DSLs that work together nicely and allow for amazingly readable test output.

dakull 12y ago

This looks awesome so far - kudos to the team. I also started benchmarking it just for fun[0] [0] - http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-quick-rails-benchmarks http://marianposaceanu.com/articles/ruby-2-2-0-preview-1-qui...

dakull 12y ago