Is it just me or is anyone else annoyed about Ruby people calling their hash table based dictionaries a "hash"? As a non-Ruby programmer, I always get confused when people talk about hashes and you can never be quite sure if it's a dictionary or an integer hash value.
Not to be a pedant, but wouldn't thread-safe automatically follow immutable?<p>If a structure is immutable, how would you be able to fuck it up, even if you abuse it via threading? I would argue the relation is so strong, that something which <i>isn't</i> thread-safe cannot be immutable. But there may ofcourse be something which I'm missing.<p>Different languages and platforms handling different key concepts differently etc.<p>Is there some properties of Ruby which makes this possible, or gives you a need for a double-guarantee, or is the declaration here simply redundant?
Hmm, I assumed this would have to be written in C so that it could use multiple threads in parallel in MRI, but it seems not. Then I remembered concurrent != parallel.
As of git HEAD at the time of this comment (5edce74):<p>1499 lines of Ruby code.<p>19 lines of comments.<p>Nope, nope, nope. I would never touch this library.<p>Good amount of tests, but the moment this library doesn't work as expected and you need to jump into the code, you're completely screwed.<p>Not usable.