From: Michael Neumann <neumann@...>
Date: 2001-07-25T19:24:07+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:18518] Re: Ruby vs. Objective Caml


Todd Gillespie <toddg@linux127.ma.utexas.edu> wrote:
>MikkelFJ <mikkelj-anti-spam@post1.dknet.dk> wrote:
>: Other languages I just went over this evening: Clean, Erlang, Haskell.
>: Erlang is a giant to install. You don't compile it into your C++ app for
>: certain. But might be very strong serverside. Clean - just started look
at
>: it. They claim to be on par with C in performance.

There are several languages (e.g. OCaml, Clean or Sather I know of) that
claim to be as fast (or even faster) than unoptimized C code.
There's even one, that claims to be twice as fast as C, at least comparing
it's Qsort against
the one of C's standard lib. It's called FISh:
http://www-staff.it.uts.edu.au/~cbj/FISh/index.html

But I prefer Ruby ;-)

Regards,

  Michael