From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-04-09T00:50:47+09:00
Subject: Re: [Q] Ruby for graphics

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Your Name Here" <jim@fivek.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Q] Ruby for graphics


> > Depends on what you consider "good".
> >
> > To me, "good" is more "is it easy to read and write", rather than
> > "does it run blindingly fast".  Others have different metrics
> > depending on what they're doing.
> >
> Well, in this case good means fast and efficient....
> 
> If you want easy to read and write at the expense of speed, why not use
> JAVA, what advantage does Ruby have over JAVA ?

:) Is this a troll?

That's a long, involved question. Just do some more
research into Ruby.

I'd say that if there were a "dynamic OOP" scale 
from 1 to 10, and C++ were a 3, then Java would 
be a 5 and Ruby an 8.

If you want speed, use C or C++. Or write the 
sensitive code in C/C++ and call it from Ruby.

Disclaimer: The above is only my opinion. Some
people don't like Ruby. 

Hal