4 ms·

I wonder if this would be a feasible funding strategy for Crystal (https://crystal-lang.org/ https://crystal-lang.org/) as well. From the scattered benchmarks I

I wonder if this would be a feasible funding strategy for Crystal (https://crystal-lang.org/ https://crystal-lang.org/) as well. From the scattered benchmarks I could find online†, Crystal seems to be just as fast, if not a bit faster. † https://github.com/kostya/benchmarks https://github.com/kostya/benchmarks, http://blog.seraum.com/crystal-lang-vs-nodejs-vs-golang-vs-julia-vs-rust-vs-luajit-vs-c-fibonacci-benchmark http://blog.seraum.com/crystal-lang-vs-nodejs-vs-golang-vs-j...

throwaway7645 9y ago
Well, they're both implemented in LLVM, but Julia uses a JIT and not straight to a native binary. I bet they have very similar performance. The use cases are different though. Julia is a replacement for MATLAB, R, Fortran, & scientific Python with speed and good macro support. Crystal is basically fast/native Ruby, so websites and business apps. You could technically use either for those applications, but the communities will be mostly scientific computing for Julia and business apps for Crystal.
- cutler 9y ago
  Last time I looked Crystal's string handling was significantly slower than Ruby's.
  - throwaway7645 9y ago
    In a pre 1.0 language there will always be some things that are still waiting to be optimized. I saw some performance spec for one of their HTTP libraries awhile back and it was a lot faster than Ruby. It might have been faster than Go.
    - glwtta 9y ago
      It was faster than everything, and by a huge margin: https://github.com/costajob/app-servers#results https://github.com/costajob/app-servers#results It does seem that immature languages tend to win a lot of benchmarks, likely because they're still cutting a lot of corners. Still, though. I only wish they picked a more "Enterprise-friendly" name...
      - throwaway7645 9y ago
        Well, it is the only LLVM language on the list. Even so, Nim transpiles to C and should be fairly comparable unless it is because of the async part or like you said they're cutting corners. I guess it's possible they're just that good, but it seems unlikely.
        dom96 9y ago
        Please stop using the word transpiles in this context. Nim compiles to C.

throwaway7645 9y ago

Well, they're both implemented in LLVM, but Julia uses a JIT and not straight to a native binary. I bet they have very similar performance. The use cases are different though. Julia is a replacement for MATLAB, R, Fortran, & scientific Python with speed and good macro support. Crystal is basically fast/native Ruby, so websites and business apps. You could technically use either for those applications, but the communities will be mostly scientific computing for Julia and business apps for Crystal.

cutler 9y ago
Last time I looked Crystal's string handling was significantly slower than Ruby's.
- throwaway7645 9y ago
  In a pre 1.0 language there will always be some things that are still waiting to be optimized. I saw some performance spec for one of their HTTP libraries awhile back and it was a lot faster than Ruby. It might have been faster than Go.
  - glwtta 9y ago
    It was faster than everything, and by a huge margin: https://github.com/costajob/app-servers#results https://github.com/costajob/app-servers#results It does seem that immature languages tend to win a lot of benchmarks, likely because they're still cutting a lot of corners. Still, though. I only wish they picked a more "Enterprise-friendly" name...
    - throwaway7645 9y ago
      Well, it is the only LLVM language on the list. Even so, Nim transpiles to C and should be fairly comparable unless it is because of the async part or like you said they're cutting corners. I guess it's possible they're just that good, but it seems unlikely.
      - dom96 9y ago
        Please stop using the word transpiles in this context. Nim compiles to C.