From: James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Date: 2006-10-25T22:48:32+09:00
Subject: Re: Is there really an impending Ruby fracture???

On Oct 25, 2006, at 12:44 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

> Well ... I've been home from RubyConf for a day now. I sort of  
> expected
> someone would have spotted this and commented on it (here) by now, but
> they haven't. In any event, I came away from the conference with a
> completely different view of the state of Ruby than David Pollak
> apparently did.
>
> https://www.lostlake.org/blog/index.php?/archives/11-The-Impending- 
> Ruby-Fracture.html

 From the article:

   ...Ruby.Net (Ruby that runs on the .Net VM, 1 full time coder
   who was recently hired by Microsoft)...

Is this accurate?  The parenthetical refers to the Ruby CLR guy, John  
Lam, that gave a talk.  I wasn't clear if this was the same project  
that Ani was referring to as Ruby on .Net.

Also:

   Matz has said that 1.9 would run native threads (rather
   than the current green threads) but YARV will ship with
   green threads because it's too difficult to maintain
   compatibility with all the C extensions that have been
   written for green threads.

That's not true.  Koichi said that YARV will use native threads with  
a giant VM lock as Python does in his talk.  These are not green  
threads.

Finally:

   At the core, I think Ruby is defined by Rails.

I couldn't disagree more.

James Edward Gray II