4 ms·
It's a cool project, but I'm not really sure what the point is. I'm doubtful that you could ever match the full expressiveness of Ruby in C++ or any compiled la
by ufmace 3y ago
It's a cool project, but I'm not really sure what the point is. I'm doubtful that you could ever match the full expressiveness of Ruby in C++ or any compiled language. If you wanna play with it because it's fun, that's fine, but I doubt that it would ever be able to do much with most of the Ruby code out there.
- sph 3y agoThankfully, progress rests on the shoulders of people doing crazy things, ignoring the nagging voices of those unable to create just for the fun of it.
- sneed_chucker 3y agoI wish this myth of dynamic == interpreted, static == compiled would die. Interpreters are almost always written in statically typed compiled languages. When you feed an interpreter source code in Ruby, Python, Perl, etc. the net effect is that you have a compiled binary program that's executing your dynamic code. So it shouldn't too great of a leap to understand that you can do full ahead-of-time compilation of dynamic code so long as you're prepared to embed a rich runtime into the binary. Common Lisp is one of the most dynamic languages in existence, and has been ahead-of-time compiled for decades. Of course, the dominant compilation paradigm for dynamic languages these days is "just-in-time" (e.g. JavaScript V8, Python PyPy, Ruby YJIT), because it allows you to use runtime frequency and type information to compile parts of the source more intelligently. But either way, the whole "dynamic languages cannot be compiled" thing isn't true.
- Tao3300 3y agoNever underestimate the power of doing it for fun.