From: "Ara.T.Howard" <ahoward@...>
Date: 2004-06-09T07:53:49+09:00
Subject: Re: ruby and mustard

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Jim Freeze wrote:

> On Tuesday,  8 June 2004 at 23:53:42 +0900, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
>>
>> what do you do when it needs to be __really__ fast BUT you also have to
>> develop it __really__ fast and would __prefer__ not to add dependancies.
>
> It depends. For what you are doing, my preference is to use Ruby
> to do all the admin work like parse command lines and manage
> the non critical sections of code, and then use either C or Ruby C
> to write the speed critical sections.
>
> I too looked at ocaml just last week. The problem I had was that
> I could not easily wrap its calls into Ruby for OS X. A method
> exists for Linux, but I need BDS support and didn't want to
> take the time to do this myself.
>
> Now the question is to use Ruby C or just plain ole C. For
> things that I can really abstract, I prefer C (sort of like
> the OO style used in the examples in the Pickaxe book) and
> then use Swig to wrap my libraries. That way, I can use the
> library independent of Ruby if I (or anyone else) ever need to.
>
> --
> Jim Freeze
> "It's not Camelot, but it's not Cleveland, either."
> 		-- Kevin White, mayor of Boston

good points - esp. bits about abstraction.  i have done that approch before
(swig wrapped generic c code) - perhaps i'll return to it...

-a
--
===============================================================================
| EMAIL   :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| PHONE   :: 303.497.6469
| A flower falls, even though we love it; and a weed grows, even though we do
| not love it. --Dogen
===============================================================================