From: James Gray <james@...>
Date: 2009-04-16T23:54:09+09:00
Subject: Re: querying using HTTP

On Apr 16, 2009, at 2:31 AM, Brian Candler wrote:

> Peter Bailey wrote:
>> I'm querying a graphics database using http.
>
> ... and ruby 1.9.1, it appears
>
>> On my server and on my PC,
>> I can successfully run a simple script that checks for the  
>> existence of
>> files in different formats—PDF, PNG, and TIFF. But, when my  
>> colleagues
>> run this same script, they get the error I display below.
>
> ruby 1.9's runtime behaviour of anything using String varies depending
> on the environment it runs in.

That's not accurate.

Certain encoding options have default settings relating to the  
environment they run in, but none of that matters if specify the  
desired encodings for your source and/or IO objects.  These defaults  
are provided as conveniences so that simple scripting can fit in  
naturally with the rest of the environment.

Removing the defaults would just mean more work for the programmer as  
you would be forced to specify all encodings even in situations where  
a default makes sense.  I also don't think it's bad to say that a  
programmer must specify the encoding of data they wish to read.  How  
in the world can we expect Ruby to get a gets() call right on a  
UTF-16LE file without us providing a warning about what the data is?

> It is quite difficult to get it behave sanely, and is such a mess  
> that I stick with ruby 1.8.

Ruby 1.8 had a single global variable that, when set, changed the  
behavior of all code in the interpreter, including the stuff I didn't  
write.  I hope that isn't your idea of a "sane" system.

Ruby 1.9 probably does require us to learn the bare minimum about how  
character encodings are handled.  It's about time.  How many years  
have we tried to get by with crossed fingers and a prayer that it  
would just work out?  Character encodings should have been required  
reading long before now.

For those who are ready to learn the basics, the new Pickaxe has a  
solid 13 page introduction.  It doesn't take long to work through and  
it covers the important stuff.  If you want to go farther, I've  
covered character encoding basics, the Ruby 1.8 system, and the new  
1.9 system a bit deeper in a series of posts to my blog:

http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/understanding_m17n

> If those don't work, then I'd suggest you stick with ruby 1.8 for the
> next year or so.

For years the Ruby community has begged for more speed and robust  
character encoding support.  The core team delivered that and much  
more this January with a production release that's substantially  
faster and has a very powerful new encoding engine.  To repay their  
monumental efforts, we complain and urge people to stick with Ruby  
1.8.  We must truly be the most ungrateful lot of bums ever.

For what it's worth, I believe Brian is wrong.  I think the best thing  
we can do as a community is to move everything to Ruby 1.9 as fast as  
possible.  If there are barriers to us doing that, we need find ways  
to tear them down.  There are a lot more plusses than minuses, I  
promise.  Ruby 1.9 is ready for us.  Come on in, the water is fine!

James Edward Gray II