3 ms·
> There is a formal spec Not really the same thing as an ECMA standard http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm http://www.ecma-in
by yread 14y ago
> There is a formal spec
Not really the same thing as an ECMA standard
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecm...
> Ruby typically uses 2-3x less code than C#
Perhaps you wanted to use a different link? This one says that it is ~10 times slower?
- tinco 14y agoEveryone knows that ruby is ~10 times slower than anything else the question is how the expressiveness compares. Of course the amount is code is going to be greater because you are more explicit about types. I program in ruby for a living and do some C# as a hobby so I know the differences..
- thebluesky 14y ago> Perhaps you wanted to use a different link? This one says that it [ruby] is ~10 times slower [than C#]? The link is correct. See the "code" section where Ruby has 2-3x less code. I won't disagree about Ruby being much slower than C# and Java. Ruby slow[er]ness has to do with it being dynamically typed, which also makes it expressive. If you are after something which is more expressive than C# and faster than C# see Scala on the JVM: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=scala http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=al...