7 ms·

Nice article. Not trying to start a subjective debate on languages/ technologies, but it did seem odd they would include a language like ruby but not python, c#

by phodo 10y ago

Nice article. Not trying to start a subjective debate on languages/ technologies, but it did seem odd they would include a language like ruby but not python, c#, or java / scala.

jsmith0295 10y ago
I mostly thought it was odd that of all of the JVM languages they included it was Clojure. Ruby sort of makes since given that Rails recently included ActionCable.
- cwyers 10y ago
  Yeah, not having Scala or Java but having Clojure was strange to me. I would be curious to see how a CLR language (C# or F# mainly) fares relative to the JVM.
  - pcunite 10y ago
    I think C# would have done well, based on IOCP.
  - tracker1 10y ago
    Depending on the implementation/deployment of the C#/F# code, it probably would have performed very well.
- kimi 10y ago
  Java would have been a bit longer than Clojure, but performance and memory usage would likely have been better.
bmh100 10y ago
Additionally, I would like to see Rust, Haskell, and .NET.
- exDM69 10y ago
  http://bitemyapp.com//posts/2016-09-03-websocket-shootout-haskell.html http://bitemyapp.com//posts/2016-09-03-websocket-shootout-ha... I happened to come across this in /r/haskell today. The results are very impressive.
  - codygman 10y ago
    Careful, there was a mistake in that Haskell code and possible bug causing it to drop a lot of messages.
chriserin 10y ago
I work with the author, the languages included came down purely to expertise available. Additional implementations have been submitted for Rust, Haskell and Ruby's event machine. A host of pull requests have been submitted to tweak the existing implementations as well. It would be awesome to see implementations in python, c# and java. There are a number of ways to do each, I assume.