Comment by MallocVoidstar
3 days ago
It's used as an example here: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20205
But not actually stated it's the plan. I'd bet whatever LLM wrote the article took it as a stronger statement than it is.
3 days ago
It's used as an example here: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20205
But not actually stated it's the plan. I'd bet whatever LLM wrote the article took it as a stronger statement than it is.
Hey there. I wrote the article. While I know the version numbers aren’t concrete, I added the proposal anyways as a way for readers to visualise what the maintainers had in mind. Since we’re only at 3.4 with 3.5 in preview, it can’t be claimed concretely what the future holds. I just didn’t make that super obvious in the post.
I had to explain the same reasoning in Reddit the other day. Perhaps it’s time to take this as a feedback and update the blog.
Btw I just asked gpt to write an article on the same topic, with a reference to the Ruby issues page. And it DID NOT add the future proposal part. So LLMs are definitely smarter than me.