From: MikkelFJ <mikkelfj-anti-spam@...>
Date: 2002-12-15T00:15:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby slow??


"Lyle Johnson" <lyle@users.sourceforge.net> wrote in message
news:3DFA6750.5070001@users.sourceforge.net...
> Garriss, Michael wrote:
>
> > Found this site about how languages stack up against each other.  This
test
> > put Ruby far behind to others.
>
> Not so fast! (no pun intended). For example, Ruby beats the pants off
> Python in the critical "Hello, World" benchmark:
>
> http://www.bagley.org/~doug/shootout/bench/hello

Yes and this is more important than you might figure -
Ruby is fairly lightweight in starting up and in including other modules.
Because it is reasonably modest in memory consumption, it avoids stalling
all kinds of caches where Java might start trashing.
Consider a .NET application - it spends a noticable amount of time just
starting up - presumably due to initial compilation. I never was a big fan
of JIT - it's like spending a weekend tuning your sportscar for a shopping
trip.

Ruby is slow in theory and fast in praxis.

Mikkel