From: Alexandru Popescu <the_mindstorm@...>
Date: 2005-06-13T01:15:20+09:00
Subject: Re: python/ruby benchmark(don't shoot the messenger)

#: the mind was *winged* after Austin Ziegler said on 6/12/2005 5:53 PM :#
> On 6/12/05, Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@ieee.org> wrote:
>> In my line of work, we use benchmarks and statistics extensively. They
>> may be useful for lying; so what? They are far more powerful for telling
>> the truth.
> 
> And there's the real tragedy. People who buy into the crap that is benchmarks.
> 
> There is only one benchmark that truly matters. Are your users
> complaining about the speed of your program? If so, then you need to
> optimise it. If not, then it's good enough.
> 
> Everything else is lies and marketing. Things like the alioth
> benchmarks don't actually shed any light on anything; they are great
> at obscuring. Nothing more.
> 
> -austin

Austin, I am still wondering: you develop f.e. 3 months to find out if your client will accept the
software you have invested into? All the companies I have been employed into were not working like
this. We have always built prototypes and decided from that point. And a prototype is a benchmark in
fact.

Also, I agree with the fact the optimization comes later in the dev cycles. But we need to have the
doors open to optimize. Moreover, I read that in Ruby you can always go and code the hot spots in C.
 What if you don't have these resources? Which are the costs to bring such a resource and make him
productive?

Maybe I am completely wrong, but this is the way the companies I have worked with are proceeding.

:alex |.::the_mindstorm::.|