Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by fizx on Friday January 30, 2009 @04:21PM (#458713)

Not yet. Think about all of the gem/plugin dependencies which may not be 1.9 compatible.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by voxxit on Friday January 30, 2009 @05:07PM (#458789)

Technically, you could check your gems, see which ones are not 1.9 compatible, fix the gems, and then release. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by jcapote on Friday January 30, 2009 @06:02PM (#458882)

But your saying that an out of the box rails 2.2.2 site works on ruby 1.9? If so, that's the first I've ever heard of it...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by catch23 on Friday January 30, 2009 @08:05PM (#459040)

in the rails 2.2 release notes, it did mention 1.9 compatibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by sho on Friday January 30, 2009 @10:10PM (#459169)

I think Rails itself works, the problem is the servers. Mongrel doesn't work on 1.9, and the others have problems too. Also the DB libraries.

Plenty of other gems don't work either, basic ones like JSON (works only in pure Ruby mode). Hopefully the stable 1.9 release spurs maintainers on a bit, but I imagine it'll take a while.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby 1.9.1 Released: First Stable Ruby 1.9 Release by catch23 on Saturday January 31, 2009 @03:42AM (#459388)

Then there are the DB libraries that only work in 1.9 like NeverBlock.

[ Parent | on HN ]