4 ms·

I don't think JRuby gets enough credit. He pretty much dismisses it because it uses a lot of memory and starts too slow for simple scripting. The JRuby team h

I don't think JRuby gets enough credit. He pretty much dismisses it because it uses a lot of memory and starts too slow for simple scripting. The JRuby team have done some tricks to speed up startup time, seems to respond almost as fast as MRI to me now. Haven't paid attention to memory though, but if you are launching a script big enough that memory is a factor I don't think the JVM is going to matter. With invoke dynamic around the corner (Java 7), it seems that JRuby is Ruby's best hope for a decent runtime. What I don't get is why all there is such a strong anti-java sentiment in the ruby community. Everyone wants to speed things up by writing native C code. I for one would much rather write java code than C code. It's just as fast and much less shitty. And it runs pretty much anywhere.

jimbokun 18y ago
Seems like the good and crappy things about Ruby and Java, respectively, complement each other well. Ruby is a high productivity language, Java not so much. The JVM is a very well engineered run time engine, Ruby's MRI not so much. Unicode, threading, fast, reliable, portable, well understood and supported. Pluses for Java, minuses for Ruby. So in principle it seems JRuby could have the best of both worlds. But for now I'm having more fun with Clojure. :)
- blasdel 18y ago
  You're absolutely right about Ruby & Java being a great Odd Couple What I find interesting is that most of the JRuby users are first and foremost Rubyists. The JVM users seem to gravitate more to Scala, Groovy, Clojure, Rhino, etc.