Comments on: IronRuby is out, Built and Running http://accidentaltechnologist.com/ironruby/ironruby-is-out-built-and-running/ Musings about Technology, Software Design and Development Wed, 16 May 2012 17:59:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Rob Bazinet http://accidentaltechnologist.com/ironruby/ironruby-is-out-built-and-running/#comment-103 Rob Bazinet Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:01:00 +0000 http://localhost/~rbazinet/?p=123#comment-103 <p>Yes, I noticed it was built around StringBuilder, very nice. I thought that would be the implementation going forward but the byte array is an interesting approach.</p> <p>Is there a public timeline for future releases and feature completeness with Ruby 1.8.6?</p> Yes, I noticed it was built around StringBuilder, very nice. I thought that would be the implementation going forward but the byte array is an interesting approach.

Is there a public timeline for future releases and feature completeness with Ruby 1.8.6?

]]> By: John Lam http://accidentaltechnologist.com/ironruby/ironruby-is-out-built-and-running/#comment-104 John Lam Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:28:00 +0000 http://localhost/~rbazinet/?p=123#comment-104 <p>I'm glad that it worked well for you out of the box! The MutableString reporting will change to just String in the future. But if you look in the MutableString.cs file, you'll see that our implementation is currently built around a .NET StringBuilder. In the future, it will evolve further, and become a byte array for maximum compatibility with Ruby 1.8.x.</p> I’m glad that it worked well for you out of the box! The MutableString reporting will change to just String in the future. But if you look in the MutableString.cs file, you’ll see that our implementation is currently built around a .NET StringBuilder. In the future, it will evolve further, and become a byte array for maximum compatibility with Ruby 1.8.x.

]]>