4 ms·
Apples to oranges again. A more relevant comparison would be Ruby to Python and in recent years Ruby has edged ahead in performance if you factor-out Python's C
by cutler 3y ago
Apples to oranges again. A more relevant comparison would be Ruby to Python and in recent years Ruby has edged ahead in performance if you factor-out Python's C-based libraries such as Numpy.
- csjh 3y agoIsn’t factoring out C based libraries ignoring a large part of the Python ecosystem?
- Alifatisk 3y agoI haven’t used Python in years but from what I’ve understood by reading other comments, factoring out C-based libraries would rule out a large portion of what makes Python so popular. Especially on the scientific side. So I think you’re right.
- cutler 3y agoYes, but if you're comparing language performance that's important.
- pdimitar 3y agoHow is a C codebase a part of the Python ecosystem? More accurate statement would be: Python is piggy-backing on hugely successful C libraries and claims big performance on their backs, IMO.
- Lio 3y agoIt's not that you should factor them out but if C is actually doing the work you can call the same excellent libraries from Ruby too. e.g. Numo for NumPy or Ruby-Polars for python polars.
- resonious 3y agoIf we're comparing "programming languages that can be used to make websites" then it's totally apples to apples. Ruby and Go (and Rust, Java, etc) are all valid options and so I think it's smart to compare them before starting a web project.