From: Carter Cheng <cartercheng@...>
Date: 2011-10-24T07:20:27+09:00
Subject: Re: macruby versus MRI 1.9

--20cf3079bf421923e304affeb15b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I guess the question for me stems from two sources-

1) how effective is MRI performance wise compared to MacRuby and Rubinius or
JRuby etc?

2) if there are any performance "benefits" how much does the JIT system
contribute?

3) How effective is LLVM as this JIT?

For example I did read some posts and had similar ideas along the lines of
how Chamber's Self thesis or more recent techniques trace trees (which
aren't really that recent since dynamic compilation in Dynamo has been
around for some time and there are probably other variants too try in this
area) could be applied to make Ruby "faster". I don't think either rbx or
macruby employ these techniques at present. Or variants thereof.


On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote:

> You should talk to the Rubinius people too, as they're also llvm +
> jit. It's entirely re-written, no MRI code (unless you consider the
> standard library MRI)
>
>

--20cf3079bf421923e304affeb15b--