From: Ryan Leavengood <mrcode@...>
Date: 2005-06-22T06:18:09+09:00
Subject: Re: 1. Ruby result:  101 seconds , 2. Java result:9.8 seconds,      3. Perl result:62 seconds

Jim Freeze said:
>
> Have you tried skipping even numbers (excluding 2 of course)?
> That should give you a little more speed.

In my informal tests, Florian's version is already about 70 times faster
than the original one. It is also about 3.5 times faster than the naive
Java version.

Good job Florian!

Also, if the algorithm cannot be optimized in this way, the slow parts can
be coded in C (which is pretty easy with RubyInline.)

When you consider that coding in Java in like having your hands tied
compared to Ruby, I'd take the "slow" Ruby anyday (and I've been
programming Java since 1997...Ruby since 2001.) Just the fact that you
need a monster like Eclipse to productively program Java makes me a bit
hesitant to continue using it. But I don't want to start language
wars...Java has its uses, like any language.

Ryan