Re: rubygems usage as a fallback

[Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no>]

]] Jordon Bedwell 

> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> wrote:
> 
> > ]] Praveen A
> >
> > > Should we comment out rubygems usage as a fallback option too?
> >
> > I don't think so, as long as the dependencies of the package pulls the
> > library in, the code is never executed.
> >
> 
> require "rubygems" is a redundant task unless this library is being built
> for >1.9.3 and even if people don't consider it expensive (and it's not
> expensive in the grand scheme of things) it's just not needed unless you
> are on old-ruby.

In the code sample Praveen posted, it's only require-d if we get a
loaderror for the packaged version, hence dead code.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are