#irb(main):001:0> "string"[0, 1]
#=> "s"
James Edward Gray II [mailto:james@grayproductions.net] wrote:
#
#I believe it's planned to have "string"[0] return "s" in Ruby 2, as
#well.
it is good but would that break a lot of (old) things? In that case, will
Ruby 2 be a different ruby?
thanks again for the info, james.
kind regards -botp
#
#James Edward Gray II
#
I believe that release is planned as a fix for any lingering issues, if if a little compatibility must be sacrificed to get there. That way we can find all new issues. 
Of course, I could be way off base. We're well of my map now...
James Edward Gray II
On Apr 15, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Peña, Botp wrote:
it is good but would that break a lot of (old) things? In that case, will
Ruby 2 be a different ruby?
it is good but would that break a lot of (old) things? In that case,
will
Ruby 2 be a different ruby?I believe that release is planned as a fix for any lingering issues, if
if a little compatibility must be sacrificed to get there. That way we
can find all new issues.
The philosophy was that breakage is maximized at
2.0, minimized afterwards. Whether this means that
Matz-ue is deliberately looking to break stuff I do
not know
I am still hoping my beloved first-order functions
are included, myself.
Of course, I could be way off base. We're well of my map now...
James Edward Gray II
E
Le 16/4/2005, "James Edward Gray II" <james@grayproductions.net> a écrit:
On Apr 15, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Peña, Botp wrote:
--
No-one expects the Solaris POSIX implementation!