From: Luis Lavena Date: 2008-04-04T07:31:49+09:00 Subject: Re: RUBY_IMPLEMENTATION On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > Ezra Zygmuntowicz wrote: > > > +1 for RUBY_ENGINE > > > > Here's a wrinkle for you...JRuby has partial support for both Rubinius and > YARV bytecode. And in the future, we'll have *full* support for both. So > what would RUBY_ENGINE be if running Rubinius bytecode under JRuby on JVM on > Windows? How about YARV bytecode on JRuby on OpenVMS? > > I think we need to take a step back and determine what we're actually > trying to track here. Is it simply what codebase the code is running > against? Is it a set of features we expect to be available? It is a host > environment? I'd argue we're trying to specify a set of features we expect > to be available, and so indicating the "engine" we're running on is the > wrong way to go. Perhaps something more like "environment" or "profile" is > the way to go for this, and let the implementation be characterized > elsewhere. > I agree with Charlie here. Currently projects are using RUBY_PLATFORM to determine functionality across platforms (mswin32, mingw, java) and provide features to each one of these. How this new RUBY_ENGINE will affect developers? Will ENGINE affect the generated bytecode in case of the compiler, or it will be evaluated at runtime every time it gets executed (like conditionals). Actually, what we are trying to track here? -- Luis Lavena Multimedia systems - Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. Douglas Adams