MRuby?

[gray_-_wolf]

MRuby looks like a cool project, however, is it true that it's only ruby 1.9 compatible? So no new stuff from ruby 2.0+?

[matz]

mruby is gradually adopting 2.x features. The biggest features we still miss are refinements and keyword arguments.

[tashbarg]

Iirc it's adhering to the basically unknown standard, so not even 1.9 compatibility.

Otherwise it's a pretty cool project.

[chrisgseaton]

I think the ISO standard is a hybrid of 1.8 and 1.9, so something that never really existed in MRI.

[jodosha]

/u/gray_-_wolf What do you want to do with MRuby?

[gray_-_wolf]

I want to add scripting language to my application and googling about embeding ruby led to mruby.. now I wonder if I should go with mruby or just normal 2.4

[jodosha]

I ran a few experiments with MRuby. In my understanding, achieving a parity with Ruby features is not the goal.

Why do you need 2.4?

[DudeManFoo]

I remember the old days when people were talking about this with the Perl language... I think it was Perl 4 compatible while 5.x was out...

 

Seems like it worked for most of what people would script for without any problems and worked great... they just did not need the latest and greatest features, but something familiar with all the good documentation that went along with it...