From: Dan Sugalski <dan@...>
Date: 2001-12-29T04:05:33+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:29570] Re: 30 Language Implementations, 25

At 04:01 AM 12/29/2001 +0900, Paul Brannan wrote:
>On Sat, Dec 29, 2001 at 03:56:57AM +0900, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Are the ruby examples reasonably correct? I'm trying to line up real
> > benchmarks to test Parrot's performance against, and if these are at least
> > OK it'd make my life a bit easier.
>
>There are a few problems with some of the tests (for example, the word
>count tests don't always follow the rules, particularly with regard to
>buffering), but for the most part the tests are correct and produce the
>correct output.  They are also almost as optimized as they will ever be
>(using tricks like for..in instead of each(), omitting the return
>keyword, etc.).

The word count test was dodgy in the perl version too (and would break on 
VMS) but that they're mostly correct and fast is what I wanted to know. Thanks.

					Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk