From: Philip Rhoades <phil@...>
Date: 2010-10-09T02:24:07+09:00
Subject: Re: A Real World example for Ruby to "compiled" version discussion

Phillip,


On 2010-10-09 02:57, Phillip Gawlowski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Philip Rhoades<phil@pricom.com.au>  wrote:
>> People,
>>
>> I have accumulated the questions from different people into this response:
> [snip /]
>> For this particular discussion:
>>
>> for k in 1..K           # generations
>>   for x in 1..X         # array width
>>     for y in 1..Y       # array height
>>       destroy parent ordered list
>>       destroy tmp ordered list
>>       offspring list becomes parent list
>>       for i in 1..I     # organism in parent ordered list
>>         asexually reproduce offspring with possible mutation
>>         possibly migrate offspring to neighbouring array cell
>>       end
>>     end
>>   end
>> end
>>
>
> [snip /]
>
>> The code doesn't change - a configuration file and the starting (initial)
>> generation can be changed.
>
> [snip /]
>
>> There are a couple of particular issues we wanted to investigate and my
>> supervisor thought that the existing stuff that was around then (about nine
>> years ago now) didn't conveniently allow us to do what we wanted - maybe it
>> is has changed now but I haven't had much exposure to other programs.  Also,
>> a lot of them then were written in some sort of graphical environment for
>> Windows or Macs and I wanted to have a CLI interface on Linux and have more
>> direct control over what was happening . .
>
> This sounds like something JRuby would be good at it, since it can JIT
> the loops, and the Java VM reaches nearly-native speeds these days.


Native to what?  Ruby, Java, C++ ?


> So, yes, improved technology could make this faster these days.


I would prefer to be able to produce stand-alone executables if possible . .

Thanks,

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil@pricom.com.au