From: Yossef Mendelssohn <ymendel@...>
Date: 2009-02-12T23:25:04+09:00
Subject: Re: If you are unhappy with the direction of Ruby 1.8.7+, respond

On Feb 12, 4:21 am, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nut...@sun.com>
wrote:
> Bill Kelly wrote:
>
> > From: "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denat...@gmail.com>
>
> >> As I remember it, Matz didn't want to have a version number like 1.8.10
>
> > For what it's worth, my recollection is that matz wasn't
> > _conceptually_ opposed to it, but rather it was not considered
> > acceptable to break the existing code in the field which performed
> > version checks based on string compares:
>
> >>> "1.8.9" > "1.8.8"
> > => true
>
> >>> "1.8.10" > "1.8.9"
> > => false
>
> I remember the discussions. I stand by my assertion that this is a bug.

I don't know about the discussions relating to this behavior, but I
find it dismaying that anyone would seriously say that this isn't
desired string comparison behavior. I mean, these are *strings*, not
anything special. They just happen to contain a certain pattern of
characters.

Or maybe you meant the bug was that people were comparing strings at
all, which is understandable (though a strange word choice).

Maybe we should start up the Perl v-string[1] debates in the Ruby
community. Actually, if Ruby core (or stdlib) had v-strings, that
would be a part of rubygems that could by set free from its cold, dark
p4 prison.


[1]: For a good time: http://search.cpan.org/~ferreira/Data-VString-0.000004/lib/Data/VString.pm

--
-yossef