From: Isaac Gouy Date: 2006-04-05T09:23:47+09:00 Subject: Re: How slow could ruby be compared to Python or Perl? Robert Dober wrote: > On 4/4/06, Isaac Gouy wrote: > > > > > > Austin Ziegler wrote: > > > On 4/4/06, Isaac Gouy wrote: > > > > Austin Ziegler wrote: > > > > > On 3/31/06, sullivanz.pku@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > This might be a stupid question, but I really wonder if ruby is > > much > > > > > > slower than python and perl. > > > > > Try it. And ignore anyone who tells you to look at the utterly > > useless > > > > > Alioth shootout. It doesn't model anything real-world and doesn't > > > > > actually tell you anything about performance for your problems. > > > > > > > > > > I haven't checked in a while, but they weren't very honest about > > their > > > > > aims last time I checked, either. It's simply a matter of > > > > > self-promotion and comparison for Inane Gullibles. > > > > "I haven't checked in a while..." > > > > Then your comments would apply to the Alioth shootout in... 2004? > > > > > > 2005. I avoid the shootout like the plague, until you pop up and > > > pretend that your pet project has any relevance to anything. > > > > > > > There's nothing wrong with saying how little can be learned from > > > > measuring small programs, but saying don't look suggests there's > > > > something to be hidden. > > > > > > No, saying "don't look" says that your aims are bogus, your tests are > > > worse, your validation is nonsensical to nonexistent, and your > > > presentation is dishonest. > > > > > > Saying "don't look" says that the Alioth shootout isn't worth the > > > server space it takes up. It's certainly not worth the amount of > > > pimping you do for it. > > > > > > -austin > > > -- > > > Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com > > > * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca > > > > And you believe all that without even looking - truly remarkable! > > > > (I suppose there are people who make judgements about Ruby without > > looking.) > > > > > > I understand that you are upset, but I *had* a look and I think I have > enough reason to consider the shootout irrelevant: > First, everybody can contribute ones program, like that, so what if I want > ruby to look bad, well easy enough, Until someone who wants to make Ruby look good contributes a better program ;-) > there comes one example into mind (c.f. > http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=binarytrees&lang=ruby), > the program does not even run. Thank you, I can see that program has been measured with too short a timeout. The same program is shown here http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=binarytrees&lang=ruby&id=0 > Second I have often seen ruby1.9 being used, futile ( so I have my two > favorite words together "futile" and "irrelevant" ;) > to explain that 1.9 is not to be used for such a thing. The measurements on Gentoo : Intel are made for Ruby 1.8.4 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=ruby&lang2=ruby > I checked a different program, sorry cannot give you the link, from the > shootout, it was written for slow performance period. Standard answer: contribute better programs. > And last but not least, performance rarely matters and when it *really* > matters you need a change of magnitude. > And for that to accomplish you have to extend ruby in C or interface with C, > which is pretty easy compared to python or - even worse - perl. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/miscfile.php?file=benchmarking&title=Flawed%20Benchmarks > > So I honestly understand why Austin is upset although, I agree with you, > scientifcly speaking his attitude is wrong. > But I believe his conclusions are correct nontheless. > > Cheers > Robert > > > -- > Deux choses sont infinies : l'univers et la b�tise humaine ; en ce qui > concerne l'univers, je n'en ai pas acquis la certitude absolue. > > - Albert Einstein > > ------=_Part_20255_25604588.1144180637053--