From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson) Date: 2002-11-22T04:16:22+09:00 Subject: Re: The ultimate Application Obiously a troll, but I couldn't resist... In article , Dat Nguyen wrote: >
I have used Ruby and some >others (Perl, Python, etc.) for some useful things. Those who know these >languages, don't need to say why. But when it comes to the ultimate >application like a language itself (Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing >can beat the awesome C. To my knowledge, most advanced chess programs >(Deep Blue, Fritz, Junior, Shredder, etc.) are written in either C or >C++, never Prolog or Lisp. Mastering C/C++ is still required when it >comes to performance. If a chess program in Ruby can beat all those >chess programs in C/C++, no naive propaganda for Ruby needs to be >made. Well, if the only criteria for a language being viable is that you can write a fast chess program in it, then I suppose you're right. And of course since chess programs are so important we should all drop what we're working on and start our own chess projects. I'll start the trend: That TaskMaster thingy is now gonna become ChessMaster. No more of those useless web apps - it's all chess all the time. Hey, wait, assembler is even faster than C! Let's implement our chess programs in assembler. Surely you have shown us a new path to enlightenment and for this we thank you. >So far I haven't spotted any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio >C++/Java/C#; most companies and managers are very well >informed. companies and managers rule, dude! ;-)

STOP MORE SPAM with href="http://g.msn.com/8HMJEN/2015">the new MSN 8 and get 2 months >FREE* > Hey, wait, this is advertising (SPAM)! Phil