The question I have, is how good a standard is it? Sometimes language standards are put together in a political way, so all the vendors can say they comply, and the standard has no teeth and no effect on portability.
Since there aren't many players in the Ruby language space, this is probably not an issue, and it's all down to how good a job the standard writers do. (Basically, I understand it's basically only matz who determines what is and isn't Ruby.)
What this should buy the community: protection from future vendor/implementation fragmentation. (But only if it's a strong standard with "teeth.")
Since there aren't many players in the Ruby language space, this is probably not an issue, and it's all down to how good a job the standard writers do. (Basically, I understand it's basically only matz who determines what is and isn't Ruby.)
What this should buy the community: protection from future vendor/implementation fragmentation. (But only if it's a strong standard with "teeth.")