From: "Bennett, Patrick" <Patrick.Bennett@...>
Date: 2003-10-01T07:16:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Article on ARTIMA

Personally, I think he's basically correct (the talkback comment), but
in practice I don't think it's that big of a problem for most Ruby
users.
For some, it is.  In particular, Ruby's performance is abysmal (at least
when compared to Perl, Python, Java, C#, etc.)  As I said though, for
many of the things that people use Ruby for, this isn't an issue (or
they write c/c++ extension modules for performance critical code).

-----Original Message-----
From: Kingsley [mailto:kingsley@icecode.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 5:05 PM
To: ruby-talk ML; bobx@linuxmail.org
Subject: Re: Article on ARTIMA


Well I don't know if this comment is factually correct or whether it is
just a 
re-iteration of an anti-ruby chinese whisper.

But If David Garamond the author is right in what he says, then I would
much 
prefer people to aknowledge this and work to improve it, than retort
with 
over-exaggerated claims about how wrong he is.

Positive criticism should be welcomed, embraced and seen as an
opportunity for 
advancement.

Thats my thoughts anyway

Kingsley


On Tuesday 30 September 2003 22:19, Bob X wrote:
> From the talkback:
>
> "Ruby is over 10 years old, very popular in Japan, gaining popularity 
> in other parts of the world, have thousands of users and hundreds of 
> hackers. However, the implementation (Ruby has only 1 currently, 
> written in C) is pretty weak. It's slow, does not support native 
> threads, does not do JIT compilation (not even bytecode), needs a 
> better GC, etc. It is especially so if we compare it with Java and 
> Smalltalk, who have gotten real good implementations (JIT compilers, 
> fast GC, threads, etc) nowadays."
>
> Comments?