From: Adrian Howard <adrianh@...>
Date: 2005-02-08T00:51:13+09:00
Subject: Re: Benchmark Mono - Ruby

On 7 Feb 2005, at 08:48, Alexander Kellett wrote:

> On Feb 7, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Ville Mattila wrote:
>>     No, you can choose whatever is most suitable for your needs. I 
>> just say
>>     that you shouldn't be surprised that interpreted language cannot 
>> compete
>>     with bytecode language. It's meanigfull to complaint that ruby is 
>> slower
>>     than python or perl... Good expample about this is the recent CSV 
>> thread.
>
> just a technical correction, python at the
> very least is already bytecode based. it just
> doesn't have a very fast / jitt'ing vm.

Perl too.

Well, I guess you could argue that it's not a linear byte code - it's 
compiled down to an internal tree structure which is then executed. 
Various modules for fiddling with it live in Perl's B:: namespace. It's 
certainly not interpreted at the "language" level.

Always been that way AFAIK - at least since the mid-nineties anyway, 
which was when I started using Perl.

Cheers,

Adrian