Prev: statsample: A statistical package for ruby
Next: tokyocabinet ruby api install problem
From: Yukihiro Matsumoto on 23 Feb 2010 00:09
Hi,

In message "Re: Speed sprint"
on Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:30:55 +0900, Benedikt Müller <benemue(a)googlemail.com> writes:

|I would suggest, that a time, say two monthes or three, only speed
|patches and bugfixes are accepted. So the development could be
|concentrated on speed.
|I'd like to hear what over users out there and the developers say to this idea.

We are very interested in performance improvement. Although I don't
think we are going to restrict changes related to performance, we are
VERY welcome the proposals, suggestions, ideas, and patches, that
related to performance.

matz.

From: Robert Klemme on 23 Feb 2010 00:15
On 22.02.2010 20:47, Benedikt Müller wrote:
> 2010/2/22 Alexander Jesner <alexander(a)jesner-edv.at>:
>> On 02/22/2010 20:30, Benedikt Müller wrote:
>>> Ruby is not the fastest interpreted language out there.
>> If you have not already done so, switch to Ruby 1.9.
> Done, and I know that there are improvements. But it's not enough :)

You know that greed is one of the seven deadly sins, do you? ;-)

Kind regards

robert

--
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/
From: Nick Brown on 23 Feb 2010 11:09
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

These benchmarks show that Ruby 1.9 (MRI) is much faster than 1.8. In
fact, it is even faster than Python (the closest competing* language).
But keep in mind that dynamically-typed, everything-is-an-object
languages will always come with performance penalties.

*Not that we're actually "competing"--we're all friends, helping
eachother make great very-high-level languages with our respective
preferred syntaxes and feature-sets. But Ruby is still way better. ;-)
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: statsample: A statistical package for ruby
Next: tokyocabinet ruby api install problem