3 ms·
In my experience (doing some fairly heavy computation in nested loops), PUC Lua is faster than Python but slower than recent versions of Ruby. LuaJIT is at lea
by bakery2k 10y ago
In my experience (doing some fairly heavy computation in nested loops), PUC Lua is faster than Python but slower than recent versions of Ruby.
LuaJIT is at least 10x faster than all three.
- jnbiche 10y ago> PUC Lua is faster than Python but slower than recent versions of Ruby Ruby faster than PUC Lua? That doesn't sound right. You're talking about Ruby MRI?
- bakery2k 10y agoYou're talking about Ruby MRI? Not the original MRI, but YARV. For this particular program, the performance of different language interpreters is: MRI (Ruby 1.8) < CPython 3.5 < CPython 2.7, PUC Lua 5.1/5.3 < YARV (Ruby 1.9/2.3) < LuaJIT -joff There is a factor of ~5x between the slowest and fastest of these interpreters. LuaJIT with the JIT enabled is ~10x faster than even its own interpreter.
- etiene 10y agoDoesn't that also use a JIT? Why are you comparing benchmarks versus PUC Lua instead of versus LuaJIT??
- bakery2k 10y agoDoesn't that also use a JIT? YARV? No. YARV is the current official Ruby interpreter - it replaced MRI in this role from Ruby 1.9 onwards.
- etiene 10y agoWeird... Sasada's presentation mentions a JIT, which is why I was confused. (http://www.atdot.net/yarv/rc2006_sasada_yarv_on_rails.pdf http://www.atdot.net/yarv/rc2006_sasada_yarv_on_rails.pdf page 15)
- jnbiche 10y agoWow, I'm not a Rubyist, so I had no idea about this. You all not only developed a faster, compliant interpreter, but Matz actually replaced MRI with an interpreter developed by a third-party as the reference Ruby interpreter? Huge props to him and the Ruby community for that. Unfortunately, as a Pythonista (although one whose paid work is mostly in JS these days), I can't imagine that happening in the Python community (not to our credit). Too much ego wrapped up in CPython.