From: Gyoung-Yoon Noh <nohmad@...>
Date: 2005-06-10T05:49:29+09:00
Subject: Re: python/ruby benchmark.

Using 'set' is somewhat faster than Hash in 1.9.
I've rewritten that code using 'set' as following:

  require 'set'

  d = Set.new

  File.open('/usr/share/dict/words') do |f|
    d << $_.chop! while f.gets
  end

  STDIN.each do |l|
    puts l unless d.include? l.chop!
  end

Here are timed results in my machine.

  $ time echo zuul | ruby18 spellcheck-hash.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.688s
  user    0m1.635s
  sys     0m0.045s

  $ time echo zuul | ruby18 spellcheck-set.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.796s
  user    0m1.748s
  sys     0m0.048s

  $ time echo zuul | ruby19 spellcheck-hash.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.694s
  user    0m1.624s
  sys     0m0.070s
  
  $ time echo zuul | ruby19 spellcheck-set.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.465s
  user    0m1.411s
  sys     0m0.053s

  $ time echo zuul | ~/usr/bin/ruby -rite spellcheck-hash.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.541s
  user    0m1.485s
  sys     0m0.054s

  $ time echo zuul | ~/usr/bin/ruby -rite spellcheck-set.rb
  zuul

  real    0m1.178s
  user    0m1.108s
  sys     0m0.062s


YARV is not that faster in this case. I guess ruby's collection
types (Array, Hash, Set...) are not sufficiently optimized than python.
I've heard that python 2.4 boosted 'list' performance upto 30% than
previous version from a python developer. I got a strong impression
on much lower memory usage through 'generator' too.

Anyway, ruby is very slower than many other languages.
But we can prove not so slower than currently presented in that site.
How about discussing about 'howto raise ruby ranking in the shootout
site'? ;-)

-- 
http://nohmad.sub-port.net