From: Francis Cianfrocca <garbagecat10@...>
Date: 2006-05-10T00:23:53+09:00
Subject: Re: Twisted for Ruby?

------=_Part_60140_33372697.1147188230543
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

LOL! Considering we're doing essentially a completely parallel rewrite of
EventMachine for Windows (using I/O completion ports), and will probably do
one for Linux 2.6 kernels (using epoll), it wouldn't take much to do one in
pure Ruby, but it might be light on features. Certainly would be light on
performance.

On 5/9/06, benjohn@fysh.org <benjohn@fysh.org> wrote:
>
> > C++ or not, I think this would be an excellent addition to the
> > ruby-verse.  I have at least two projects that could use this kind of
> > framework.  I'd be happy to test the ruby/os x side of things.
>
> Would it be terrifically difficult to have both a c++ implementation,
> and a pure Ruby one? :) You'd guess the Ruby implementation would be
> about a 10th the size anyway ;)
>
>
>
>
>

------=_Part_60140_33372697.1147188230543--