From: Reid Thompson <reid.thompson@...>
Date: 2007-09-22T13:00:15+09:00
Subject: Re: How fast does your Ruby run?

Todd Benson wrote:
> On 9/21/07, xx xx <pietia.moo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> xx xx wrote:
>>> hello !
>>>
>>> My hardware:
>>> Laptop Asus A6TC - Debian Sid i386
>>> AMD Thurion64x2
>>>
>>> uname -a:
>>> Linux adom 2.6.22.5 #1 SMP Wed Aug 29 01:16:06 CEST 2007 i686 GNU/Linux
>>>
>>> ---------------
>>> tests:
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for "269313 iterations" in my previous post - i couldn't edit it
>>
>> btw. what is a "version though *ducks* " ?
> 
> lol.  I imagine he doesn't want to get swatted by ruby purists.  He
> compiled into machine code instead of using the interpreter?
> 
> For what it's worth, I was able to have an 800MHz machine do 30
> seconds with the 1.8.6 standard build from source by disabling the GC
> in irb and loading via...
> 
> irb> load "test.rb"
> 
> Standard time during normal computer operation for executing the OP's
> code was around 49+/-5 seconds.  Normal operation included having a
> heavy use network session mixed with X Windows open and a window
> manager.
> 
> I pushed it to do less than 20 seconds by rewriting the code
> (cheating) to omit the inject method, making it look ugly with while
> loops, and also leaving out the puts/p/print methods.
> 
> I will confirm that it was extremely easy to beat the one-click
> install on a newer/faster Windows machine with 1.8.6.  Nothing against
> that, though, because making a clean install of anything on Windows is
> nothing less than an act of God (nothing against the Windows fans
> either; it justs seems harder than it needs to be; I think this will
> change eventually).  I have yet to attempt Cygwin or MingW building on
> a Windows system, though.  I haven't tried the 1.9 installer yet,
> either.
> 
> Todd
I've built using cygwin several times w/out issue.  Not recently though, 
the setup version has been kept pretty up to date and has been speedy 
enough for what I use it for. ( results are posted earlier in the thread )