4 ms·

Why don't MRI developers use RubySpec?

• nateberkopec 12y ago
  As linked in another comment, basically: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7549#note-2 https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7549#note-2 1. Matz is, and always will be BDFL. 2. The core Ruby team wants to talk in terms of C and MRI being the Ruby spec, not a third party/written RubySpec
  • Tobu 12y ago
    They could always have their own fork/branch for upcoming releases of Ruby. It's not like the spec has to freeze the language.
  • vidarh 12y ago
    That's an absolutely terrifying attitude from a language developer....
    • nateberkopec 12y ago
      Is it? Python is exactly the same. It has no language spec (defined by its implementatation), and it has a BDFL who hasn't pushed for one.
      • nedbat 12y ago
        It would be good for Python to have more rigor in its definition. But the situation here doesn't have an analog in the Python world: there is no "PythonSpec" third-party test suite that is a) more complete than the official suite, b) exposing segfaults in previously working code, and c) going unused by the core developers.
      • vidarh 12y ago
        That other languages are equally badly specified is not a good argument for why it's not terrifying. Then again, I don't care about Python. I do care about Ruby.