From: Louis-Philippe <default@...>
Date: 2010-11-09T03:18:49+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Perofrmance

--0016e659fd14a9bfac04948ea771
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

One could even say even 1.8 wasn't that bad.  Made a benchmark last month
which had 1.8.7 as participant, and it shows ruby has some speed edge in it=
s
fast load time.  If some would like to see the bench:

http://www.untilnil.com/2010/10/recursivefibbenchcontinued/


2010/11/8 Ammar Ali <ammarabuali@gmail.com>

> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Phillip Gawlowski
> <cmdjackryan@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > 2010/11/7 J=F6rg W Mittag <JoergWMittag+Ruby@googlemail.com<JoergWMitta=
g%2BRuby@googlemail.com>
> >:
> >> Ruby Me wrote:
> >>> Why people say that Ruby is a slow language?
> >>
> >> Because they don't understand the difference between a programming
> >> language and a compiler.
> >
> > Or because they are stuck in the "CPU time is expensive!" mindset. ;)
>
> Or simply because they are parroting what they heard years ago,
> without taking the time to check for themselves.
>
> Regards,
> Ammar
>
>

--0016e659fd14a9bfac04948ea771--