From: Sean Russell <ser@...>
Date: 2002-05-05T07:31:52+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby vs. Java vs. Native trivia

Matt Armstrong wrote:

> This pretty well proves that Ruby does the "scripting language" thing
> well.  E.g. your Ruby version is only 2.4k.
> 
> It would be interesting to compare more significant applications.  I
> think Java usually beats Ruby once the startup time is factored out,
> so any app that runs for a long time probably runs faster in Java.

What surprised me was that the Ruby script was nearly as fast as the 
compiled-to-native version of the Java implementation.  IE, Ruby, 
interpreted, and also requiring the loading of a virtual machine, was 
nearly as fast as a non-interpreted Java app.

--- SER