From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2007-10-05T11:51:01+09:00
Subject: Re: cygwin's Ruby

Robert Klemme wrote:
> Hm, cygwin is also a convenient crutch: installing and updating is 
> pretty easy.  No hassle with compiling etc.
> 
> Frankly, I had expected a bit more technical detail on deficiencies that 
> would discount cygwin's Ruby.

The last time I checked, the Cygwin Ruby was slightly faster than the 
One-Click Ruby on the same machine on one benchmark -- my 
MatrixBenchmark. However, I'm pretty sure that was back in the Ruby 
1.8.5 days -- I haven't messed with *any* Windows Ruby recently, mostly 
because booting my laptop into Windows takes forever. :(

> I don't do GUI programming with Ruby and cygwin's Ruby has served me 
> well so far.  I also did not notice significant performance hits (but 
> then again, I didn't really benchmark different Ruby versions - I just 
> always found it fast enough).  So far I'm more concerned with 
> performance on a Sun box where the Ruby install seems to crawl... :-)

By "Ruby install" do you mean the process of installing Ruby?