From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2006-09-14T23:58:18+09:00
Subject: Re: Metaruby, BFTS, Cardinal and Rubicon - State of play?

------=_Part_67933_17166150.1158245853571
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 9/14/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
>
> Robert Dober wrote:
> > And you benchmark algorithms written in the same language, BUT the
> shootout
> > benchmarks *different languages* and I have looked at the algorithms
> they
> > use just once, that was enough.
> >
> > The point is use it as a tool if you find it useful, but here it is use=
d
> > for
> > advocacy.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Robert
> It's a perfectly natural desire to want to compare languages. To do that
> requires micro-benchmarks that will execute in all of the languages. But
> I think you're missing my point,


well I did, was not clear  to me sorry

which is that Ruby is slower than the
> other dynamic languages on microbenchmarks because the implementation of
> Ruby hasn't been performance-tuned to the extent that Perl, Python and
> PHP have been tuned.


which does not mean that I agree

It's not, as far as I can tell, because of anything
> fundamental in the syntax or semantics of the Ruby language that
> prohibits that tuning.
>
> So rather than whine about advocacy or say "I looked at the algorithms
> they use just once, that was enough", why not look at the algorithms
> they use and tune the Ruby interpreter so it executes those algorithms
> as efficiently as Perl, PHP and Python?


Did I whine? yes if you want so, I whine  about that  site because it is
irrelevant.
That has nothing to do with ruby BTW.
Furthermore I think that it would be a bad idea to optimize ruby that way, =
I
think ruby shall be optimized the ruby way, but only future will tell.

Benchmarketing is a fact of life
> in the "computer industry". Fortunes are made and lost because one gizmo
> is faster than another gizmo on some "meaningless benchmark".


Shall we not "whine" about what does not please us? I thank we shall!

In short:
>
> 1. I don't see any fundamental reason why Ruby can't be as fast as Perl,
> Python, or PHP.


Yes indeed

2. It isn't there yet.


Maybe but that is not a reason to accept bad measurements, especially
because it will not put it there!

But I guess we have a very opposed view about benchmarking, well that is a
good thing too :)

Cheers
Robert


--=20
Deux choses sont infinies : l'univers et la b=EAtise humaine ; en ce qui
concerne l'univers, je n'en ai pas acquis la certitude absolue.

- Albert Einstein

------=_Part_67933_17166150.1158245853571--